Re: [113attendees] hybrid meetings: the worst of both worlds

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

On 25/03/2022 22:13, Leif Johansson wrote:
> its ironic that this point appears to have been somewhat lost in the
> thread: I do *not* believe that remote can replace onsite, I just
> believe we will be defeated by laziness if we’re not careful…. Remote
> is comfortable, just not good for us.

I agree. I thought the meeting went very well, given all the
factors involved. (So I don't agree with Leif's choice of
subject line.)

I would though encourage the IESG to be more radical with
the f2f agenda time than was the case for 113. My particular
suggestion/hobby-horse would be to run the hackathon Mon-Thu
in the mornings and WG sessions/plenary/other things in the
afternoons. As others have said, we could also encourage use
of online interims for WGs and topics that don't really need
f2f time, so I'd also bump up the occurrence of "other
things" in those afternoon sessions, e.g. perhaps a session
devoted to revisiting the overall documentation of DNS as has
been suggested on dnsop. Regardless of whether those specific
suggestions are considered, I do think we need to move away
from the kind of agenda structure we used prior to 2020.

Anyway, it was really great to see a good few people this
week. And I look forward to seeing more who couldn't make it
this time, and to meeting new people, at IETFs to come.

Cheers,
S.