Re: [73attendees] Attendance by country

"Rosen, Brian" <Brian.Rosen@neustar.biz> Thu, 04 December 2008 19:30 UTC

Return-Path: <73attendees-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: 73attendees-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-73attendees-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C822028C13E; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 11:30:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: 73attendees@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 73attendees@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96F4E28C13E for <73attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 11:30:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cV9DOqxviSi8 for <73attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 11:30:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from neustar.com (ns6.neustar.com [156.154.16.88]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 847C43A67AB for <73attendees@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 11:30:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; d=neustar.biz; s=neustarbiz; c=simple/simple; q=dns; t=1228419019; x=1228505419; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-class:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encod ing; b=ctfi20D7r3RRgDpBTTJGO23CtHH5vfSXuBm9BqGZpz8RR8avJYjLp9/H8N6UwgroV1OX8z1K+2HH71 fJEe/b5A==
Received: from ([10.31.13.50]) by stihiron2.va.neustar.com with ESMTP id 5202732.13895674; Thu, 04 Dec 2008 14:30:02 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 14:29:15 -0500
Message-ID: <C80ADC57CB3BB64B94A9954A816306C5F7929C@STNTEXCH11.cis.neustar.com>
In-Reply-To: <18744.11091.630143.477735@sbrim-mbp.local>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [73attendees] Attendance by country
Thread-Index: AclWRCWUdG4CVc2iR8CQd3vr87cFhQAADkzw
References: <0016361e7d947b974e045d3cb4d6@google.com><58A8A797-AB7A-4A23-BA2E-614B468E848F@fugue.com> <18744.11091.630143.477735@sbrim-mbp.local>
From: "Rosen, Brian" <Brian.Rosen@neustar.biz>
To: Scott Brim <sbrim@cisco.com>, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Cc: 73attendees@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Attendance by country
X-BeenThere: 73attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for the attendees of IETF 73 meeting." <73attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/73attendees>, <mailto:73attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/73attendees>
List-Post: <mailto:73attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:73attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/73attendees>, <mailto:73attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: 73attendees-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: 73attendees-bounces@ietf.org

I have a fair amount of experience with this sort of thing.

I don't think it's possible.

The fundamental problem is that so much happens at an IETF meeting
outside of the sessions.  We don't know how to make remote interaction,
especially between people who don't know each other pretty well, to work
that covers those non-session interactions.  

On the other hand, it IS possible to make all remote participation work.
Conversely, it's not possible to have a mix of in person and remote
participation work very well for a large group.   Even for a smaller
group (say 10-20), while it's possible, it's prohibitively expensive at
this time.

If you think about it, you already know that.  Just thinking about
regular conference bridges: everyone on the bridge works better than
some people in a room and others on the bridge.  The in room people get
better interaction between themselves but worse interaction with remote
participants: worse than if everyone was on the bridge.  The remote
participants get horrible experience with the mix.

If you add text as a shared experience, it's pretty much even.  Text
works the same in person or not.  If you try to make text substitute for
voice or video, it fails.

If you add video, in a mixed environment, it gets worse, albeit somewhat
less worse for the in-room folks than the remote folks.

So, if you want the best overall experience, you do it all remote.  

But, as I said, that's just the session part.  You can't get the non
session part to work for remote participants.

Brian

-----Original Message-----
From: 73attendees-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:73attendees-bounces@ietf.org]
On Behalf Of Scott Brim
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 2:11 PM
To: Ted Lemon
Cc: 73attendees@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Attendance by country

Excerpts from Ted Lemon at 14:05:17 -0500 on Thu  4 Dec 2008:
> If we were really going to do this, I would think that the way to do  
> it would be to make sure that participation in the meeting from  
> offsite was a satisfying experience.

I would work on making the face-to-face meetings almost irrelevant.  
_______________________________________________
73attendees mailing list
73attendees@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/73attendees
_______________________________________________
73attendees mailing list
73attendees@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/73attendees