Re: [108attendees] Successful IETF 108

Benoit Claise <> Tue, 04 August 2020 07:02 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 202433A09F6 for <>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 00:02:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.649
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.949, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CaDsd2Z7IaYL for <>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 00:02:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7709F3A09DA for <>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 00:02:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=4965; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1596524554; x=1597734154; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version: in-reply-to; bh=ZfybVz3VxGyLyzHRdxEeTjhkN71srF+4g7nU5Sl6Nz4=; b=Kb3yyUvHR+BouuniiDUyVFC9txbBQjnIcDLKKSa2nkYbUr+jLXVrAEPH ZNJF5rHz5gPcVJOM5laR8heDDQ156z6tXH4KL7iAEGGo1p/xCa0lkiQ7Z TETL+A13g87l2ynK6ltkYt2Fi915l/q1cB9/7YBFuAbdHBNRHd4ldG6Q6 U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BfAwCBBylf/xbLJq1gHAEBAQEBAQc?= =?us-ascii?q?BARIBAQQEAQGCCoNtATKEYYkBh3Mlk3eIFwsBAQEMAQEvBAEBhEwCgjslOBM?= =?us-ascii?q?CAwEBCwEBBQEBAQIBBgRthWiFcgEFI2YLBBQqAgJXBgEMCAEBgyKCfbFxdoE?= =?us-ascii?q?yhVKDSYFAgTiJCYQfgUE/gTgMgl0+gQSGT4JgBJAIpgmCa5l9BQcDHoJ8jlU?= =?us-ascii?q?ojgGSJpQQixQCBAsCFYFqI4FXMxoIGxWDJU8ZDY43jjE/A2cCBgEHAQEDCZA?= =?us-ascii?q?cAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.75,433,1589241600"; d="scan'208,217"; a="28463129"
Received: from (HELO ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 04 Aug 2020 07:02:30 +0000
Received: from [] ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 07472QMM027907 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 4 Aug 2020 07:02:29 GMT
To: Keith Moore <>,
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Benoit Claise <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 09:02:26 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------3CFB1EFEDA9C9CCB3937E63D"
Content-Language: en-US
X-Authenticated-User: bclaise
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: Tue, 04 Aug 2020 07:02:36 -0000

On 04/08/2020 04:32, Keith Moore wrote:
> On 8/3/20 10:17 PM, Bron Gondwana wrote:
>> There's an assumption in here that the presenting of the slides 
>> doesn't have any benefit, which I don't believe is true.
>> As the presenter talks through the slides they are aligning the 
>> thoughts of everybody in the room (including themselves) and hence 
>> when we get to the conversation, everybody has the cache state loaded 
>> into their brain and the conversation can be productive.  I don't 
>> think that "read the slides in advance and come with questions" will 
>> give the same alignment.
>> I'm not saying "there's not better way", but it's worth considering 
>> the positives of the existing patterns and seeing how we can preserve 
>> them.
> I think it makes more sense to say "given that meeting time is 
> precious even when people don't have to physically travel to the 
> meetings, what's the most effective way to use that time to further 
> the goals of the group?"
Granted. Time is always precious but not so precious as during a 
physical meeting week.

Most of the time, the speed of an organization depends on the number of 
meetings per year. With 4 meetings/year instead of 3, we know that IETF 
would move faster. To (try to) be on par with opensource projects speed, 
we have to adopt monthly or bi-weekly virtual calls. Whether you call 
that design team (with only active participants) or working group 
meeting (with everybody), it's a detail.

Those recurring virtual calls is also what we have in most companies in 
our industry. With 2 possible outcomes. Either the project takes off 
rapidly, or there is a lack of interest/energy/time and the project 
dies. Both are valid outcomes for IETF drafts and WGs.

Regards, Benoit