Re: [108attendees] Successful IETF 108

Toerless Eckert <> Sun, 02 August 2020 06:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 950B83A079E for <>; Sat, 1 Aug 2020 23:05:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.002
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GfLEIWPrp4Om for <>; Sat, 1 Aug 2020 23:05:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 624EA3A0796 for <>; Sat, 1 Aug 2020 23:05:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAABA548438; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 08:05:10 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by (Postfix, from userid 10463) id CCC68440059; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 08:05:10 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2020 08:05:10 +0200
From: Toerless Eckert <>
To: Ben Campbell <>
Cc: "" <>
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [108attendees] Successful IETF 108
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list for IETF 108 attendees <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2020 06:05:19 -0000

On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 12:25:20AM -0500, Ben Campbell wrote:
> > I was suggesting on manycouches to encourage more use of pre-recorded video clips
> > for all those parts of sessions where thats feasible. Watch them in
> > your own time zone in the week before IETF. Reduces the amount of time
> > we need synchronously during IETF week.
> > 
> > Of course: Seems to widely depend on the individual RG/WG whether such asynchronuous
> > ToI is a larger or minor part of the time spent in the group.
> > 
> > Would be nice if meetecho had stats. If we accounted all the time
> > where individual speakers talked for more than 2 minutes as better done
> > via a pre-recorded clip, how much would that be ?
> Recording video of even marginally useable quality is a huge undertaking for most people. I suspect the percentage of IETF contributers that have the skills, time, resources, and inclination to do so is small. A push in this direction would create huge new barrier to participation. Sure, we have a few people who are good at this, but that doesn???t mean it???s easy.

I have consumed over the past few months a couple of research conferences
where pre-recorded video clips where used, created by the individual
contributors. I did not see a difference in quality of those that
where given live. Rather the opposite, because like when i did the same
myself, the pre-recording allowed to repeat the recording and train it.
Especially for presentations of 4..10 minutes that actually improves
quality quite a bit.

I did not say this MUST be done, i was solely saying that we should
allow this to become an option chosen by the presenter.

Given how we are expecting that attendees have read the draft before
the meeting anyhow, a presenter could equally expect that attendees
have watched the video. So not even a process change for attendees.

I can not see how offering another option creates barrier. I think
it is rather the opposite.

> IMO, If we have hopes of reducing synchronous time, we need to get further away from the idea of ???presentations??? at all.  The old days of reading drafts and discussing via email handled this better than we do today (with the possible exception of groups that do most everything in github.)

I have read many drafts where i could not make heads or tails out of
until i saw the presentation. Typically because context,  motivation,
examples and visualization are often considered to be too much
work, too difficult to do or even undesirable in e.g.: protocol specification
drafts (at least that what it always looks to me when i am complaining
about their absence).


> Thanks,
> Ben.