There is also the job of the chairs to sense which proposals have backing and which do not. That is currently pretty clear to me. Also note that the sessions (at least to me) are not meant for presentations of the proposals, they are meant as possibility for clarification or discussions of a certain solutions viability. But see my mail on proposal for the agenda.I am worried that we would spend large amount of time in our first meeting for a long time going through proposals, without a clear picture of where this would lead us.It is a job of chairs to assign appropriate amount of time for each presentation. It is a job of chairs to reserve appropriate amount of time for the wrap up discussion.
Why? If there are few proposals with wide support, that to me is an achievement over many proposals with little support. We are trying to move towards a very distant consensus here.From what I can see there are very few proposals that have any broader support.That's why we need presentations and discussions.
Well, at some point someone will have to. Be it me and Sean, the IESG or Pekka as presenting an overview.We shouldn't expect Pekka can draw a clear picture to lead us.
Well, I was not going to ask him to present his views of the proposals.Having presentation by Pekka, you will get view of Pekka, but nothing more than that, which is not so productive.
Rather a summary of the classes of solutions we see. Without any
comments on the solutions as such. That is also what I understood that
he was willing to do.
It's Pekka's view of classification.
I haven't seen much disagreement on that here though.
No. I am saying that there are few proposals here that are a) Being discussed b) Seems to have any support that is wider than the author. Some of the proposals would not even have the support of their authors if we where moving forward on a longer term solution (like mine and Iljitsch I guess).Discussion on solution classes, if any, should be more abstact and should not be based on specific proposals. Overview on specific proposals is a different topic.That is why I wanted this split in to parts. One to give the overview (abstracts if you want) of the classes of solutions, one part on the proposals that appears to have the widest support.You are saying to select proposals that appears to have the widest support based on the Pekka's view of classification.
Again, I only see work being done on loc/id and some on host based solutions. There are good and bad suggestions and characteristics in both of those discussions. That are why we are having them.That's not fair. Worse, a good class can contain poor solutions that classes and solutions are rather orthogonal.