Re: [108attendees] Successful IETF 108

Keith Moore <> Tue, 04 August 2020 07:13 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3F693A0F43 for <>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 00:13:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.945
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.945 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.949, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kz9tB6uolgKN for <>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 00:13:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83C873A0F33 for <>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 00:13:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal []) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2F345C0117; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 03:13:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 04 Aug 2020 03:13:45 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=pWIIh6Wn/yR632RC467LYzAC1g2bpMJY/ccqVZUu3 Qk=; b=M0mJDmL013+dgczL5eprSMdWlvsY/fznKUk7HCcVpVmpyDEkp/C327ypI iseDaS1u4dTR47OeACmwkCgBl5FPWR+LbFgwcNiM4Z18c68Q0Ueva07eS6GjuKSM iR+NLBrOuMpnpUT2Z3PnM0iOnMNfGieaEqueZILUyaJ3ju+NQJ6qq2b+M8JdMj1O YS4ndAdywrQ2ldDe1/sIlHGCO34I6XH1jqco+3wqawo8L/kDkp9YLAi/D4hswiVy QsZx3IFJ6SPzzTIKYvriW8Hlx3JvoyXTKvTfTu2OVT+R1YExT7BvRLydsAQ5OVKM G86laJFAN1kHQaFTTWwjFysyKg6MQ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:qQopX6Zs5MIV-KGKRD4v4Nj17ow-_OMGLOHbX2H92SmT9mT1sY9imQ>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrjeehgdduudeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepuffvfhfhkffffgggjggtgfesthekredttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepmfgvihht hhcuofhoohhrvgcuoehmohhorhgvsehnvghtfihorhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomh eqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhephefhuedtheefgfefgffhkeehgfeugfeiudeugeejkeef leelueeiffetfeeuudeunecukfhppedutdekrddvvddurddukedtrdduheenucevlhhush htvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmohhorhgvsehnvght fihorhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:qQopX9aC3Zkl3E8o3vvep9P8d0zv4lCNl4_MWbDqKOoHGSH10Q7saA> <xmx:qQopX09Rha-vugWwmLbhBhlf3Dm7sGzll15WoWer1YK6Hdi-n56ppw> <xmx:qQopX8oEiD6W5ERrbcjbF73IpfXwWe2SB-6dvG_0yHR_KsKKHFVYwQ> <xmx:qQopXy7ys2S6iOLG1dhS5sfikYHQFFDge4aaHs99NNpQHcD2MmxKCQ>
Received: from [] ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id CC4A53280064; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 03:13:44 -0400 (EDT)
To: Benoit Claise <>,
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Keith Moore <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 03:13:43 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
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 07:13:48 -0000

On 8/4/20 3:02 AM, Benoit Claise wrote:

> 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.

I'm not a big fan of monthly or bi-weekly calls because that discourages 
cross-area review and increases the potential for groups to work at 
cross-purposes with one another.  Of course, under current pandemic 
circumstances, increased use of virtual interim meetings is better than 
slowing to a standstill.

On the other hand, if we're not going to be traveling physically to 
meetings for a few years, we could perhaps increase frequency of 
IETF-wide meetings as you suggest.

Basically I think these conditions are likely to be with us long enough 
that we'll have to change our habits of working.   Which might be a good 
thing because we've been stuck in these habits for 20+ years.   But 
there are lots of considerations to take into account.