Re: [111attendees] test
John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Fri, 23 July 2021 17:31 UTC
Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: 111attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 111attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB3EF3A0D91; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 10:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xupkCW_Zq1he; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 10:31:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (bsa2.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C0D33A0D7E; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 10:31:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1m6z0Y-000F0v-Dv; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 13:30:46 -0400
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 13:30:40 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
cc: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>, 111attendees@ietf.org, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola=40open-xchange.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com>
Message-ID: <08ED222C861609ACCF4FBE9F@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <EC19AD3B-6392-4BC5-8A54-A28C563B7ABA@eggert.org>
References: <c211bfe6-0ffb-b4d8-a3b8-840ab9ee0368@gmail.com> <af8652ed-179a-78d5-eb47-02302ba5e5c2@labs.htt-consult.com> <F7AA1B7F-23E8-48FB-B89B-AB2DAF1F1F8A@gmail.com> <CAAm_rSJcKNJchYt2_CEwBFQapQ3bDfbPXrJQkHQnsKW2i193Dw@mail.gmail.com> <ecad2565-6447-2065-53c6-f46d55666888@nthpermutation.com> <m2wnphq4ko.wl-randy@psg.com> <758515384.164289.1627031655741@appsuite-gw1.open-xchange.com> <0043DCA8-C794-4146-AC2A-F1600ACA2D98@tzi.org> <20210723132655.GI57276@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <EC19AD3B-6392-4BC5-8A54-A28C563B7ABA@eggert.org>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/111attendees/jJUptVwd_S4NN_fcXQal4CIZXKo>
Subject: Re: [111attendees] test
X-BeenThere: 111attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list for IETF 111 attendees <111attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/111attendees>, <mailto:111attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/111attendees/>
List-Post: <mailto:111attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:111attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/111attendees>, <mailto:111attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 17:31:08 -0000
--On Friday, July 23, 2021 16:37 +0300 Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On 2021-7-23, at 16:26, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote: >> I for once think that it will only work well if the in-person >> meeting part would require attendees even when being together >> in a room to use their notebooks for discussions instead >> of having a physical line at a single microphone, so that >> there is more fairness between local and remote, but that >> was never really discussed on manycouches or >> picked up their documents. > > that is because SHMOO is not chartered to work on guidelines > for hybrid meetings - it is chartered to work on guidelines > for fully online meetings. (I think I recall seeing that being > pointed out on the manycouches list.) > > If community members would like to make proposals for hybrid > meetings, that can of course be done via individual I-Ds. But > SHMOO cannot begin work in this space without a rechartering. But, Lars, moving up several thousand meters... Independent of the more specific suggestions from several of the people you have copied and others, I think one of two things is true as a matter of logic. Either (1) we are convinced that, realistically, fully in-person meetings are so far in the future that we should concentrate our energy on figuring out how to make all online meetings work as well as possible or (2) unless there is some likely flag day in the near further such that we can realistically plan on almost everyone coming back to "normal", in-person meetings all at once, we should be putting effort into figuring out how to do hybrid meetings well, starting with figuring out what "hybrid" means for us. If the first case applies, spending time in SHMOO and/or in consultations by the LLC fine-tuning criteria for going back to in-person meetings or whether the "next" meeting will be in person, is a waste of time and resource. Either way, it seems to me that, as IETF Chair and General Area AD, it seems to me, if the SHMOO charter and work are no longer a good match for the needs of the IETF, you have both the authority and responsibility to make that determination and to either shut things down or initiate a conversation about adjusting the charter so that things get onto a more useful track. Or you could propose that people start working on a charter for a SHMHybrid WG that would compete with SHMOO for interested people, time, and resources (it is probably clear that I don't think much of that idea, but it is logically possible). It seems to me however that, unless you have a plan about how individual I-Ds --ones that the experience of the last 18 months suggests would be very controversial-- would reach consensus without a WG structure and be processed, is sort of missing the point. thanks for listening, john (for identification in this context: still, I believe, the only AD to have decided that a WG was going sufficiently off the rails to have shut it down in the middle of the meeting -- no IESG member is being paid big bucks by the IETF to be popular, only to Do the Right Thing.) > > Thanks, > Lars >
- [111attendees] test Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [111attendees] test Vittorio Bertola
- Re: [111attendees] test ANURAG VIJAY AGRAWAL
- Re: [111attendees] test Jared Mauch
- Re: [111attendees] test ANURAG VIJAY AGRAWAL
- Re: [111attendees] test Ujjwal Sharma
- Re: [111attendees] test Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [111attendees] test Henk Birkholz
- Re: [111attendees] test Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [111attendees] test Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
- Re: [111attendees] test Carsten Bormann
- Re: [111attendees] test STARK, BARBARA H
- Re: [111attendees] test Toerless Eckert
- Re: [111attendees] test Toerless Eckert
- Re: [111attendees] test Robert Moskowitz
- Re: [111attendees] test Carlos M. Martinez
- Re: [111attendees] test Robert Moskowitz
- Re: [111attendees] test Robert Moskowitz
- Re: [111attendees] building up interaction credit… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [111attendees] test Nigel Hickson
- Re: [111attendees] test Robert Moskowitz
- Re: [111attendees] test Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [111attendees] test Michael StJohns
- Re: [111attendees] test Robert Moskowitz
- Re: [111attendees] test Warren Kumari
- Re: [111attendees] test Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
- Re: [111attendees] test Julia Urbina-Pineda
- Re: [111attendees] test Nigel Hickson
- Re: [111attendees] test Randy Bush
- Re: [111attendees] test Toerless Eckert
- Re: [111attendees] test MORTON JR., AL
- Re: [111attendees] test John C Klensin
- Re: [111attendees] test Sanjeev Gupta
- Re: [111attendees] test Vittorio Bertola
- Re: [111attendees] test Carsten Bormann
- Re: [111attendees] test Randy Bush
- Re: [111attendees] test Toerless Eckert
- Re: [111attendees] test Nigel Hickson
- Re: [111attendees] test Robert Moskowitz
- Re: [111attendees] test Lars Eggert
- Re: [111attendees] [Ext] Re: test Paul Muchene
- Re: [111attendees] [Ext] Re: test Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [111attendees] test Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [111attendees] test Toerless Eckert
- Re: [111attendees] [Ext] Re: test Paul Muchene
- Re: [111attendees] test Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [111attendees] test Ted Lemon
- Re: [111attendees] [Ext] Re: test Henk Birkholz
- Re: [111attendees] test Andrew Campling
- Re: [111attendees] test Toerless Eckert
- Re: [111attendees] test Carsten Bormann
- Re: [111attendees] test Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [111attendees] test Marie-Jose Montpetit
- Re: [111attendees] test Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [111attendees] test David Brown
- Re: [111attendees] test Robert Moskowitz
- [111attendees] Please change the Subject line [wa… Bob Hinden
- Re: [111attendees] test Diego Dujovne
- Re: [111attendees] Please change the Subject line… Jim Reid
- Re: [111attendees] Please change the Subject line… Toerless Eckert
- Re: [111attendees] test Ted Lemon
- Re: [111attendees] multisite remote hybrid meetin… Robert Moskowitz
- Re: [111attendees] The joyful benefits of (hybrid… Henk Birkholz
- Re: [111attendees] multisite remote hybrid meetin… Diego Dujovne
- Re: [111attendees] test of 111attendees list and … Oscar Garcia
- [111attendees] future hybrid meeting discuss (was… Toerless Eckert
- Re: [111attendees] test John C Klensin
- Re: [111attendees] multisite remote hybrid meetin… Diego Dujovne
- Re: [111attendees] Planning for hybrid meetings (… Jay Daley
- Re: [111attendees] test Stewart Bryant
- Re: [111attendees] test Stewart Bryant
- Re: [111attendees] test Chukwuka Odele
- Re: [111attendees] test Brian E Carpenter
- [111attendees] Hybrid meetings (was: Re: test) Lars Eggert
- Re: [111attendees] Hybrid meetings (was: Re: test) John C Klensin
- Re: [111attendees] Hybrid meetings (was: Re: test) Lars Eggert
- Re: [111attendees] test Suresh Krishnan
- Re: [111attendees] Hybrid meetings (was: Re: test) Jay Daley