[93attendees] making better uses of IETF f2f time

Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> Tue, 21 July 2015 14:24 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 10:24:44 -0400
Message-ID: <CAG4d1rfvZerx9A4vmEz2Bsub78bF-EL-_HST_sFZWGATrUfYCA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
To: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2993a6d07bf051b636ade
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/93attendees/rMn4usAiWTbKYyXiyvleO4QgDsg>
Cc: "93attendees@ietf.org" <93attendees@ietf.org>
Subject: [93attendees] making better uses of IETF f2f time
Precedence: list

(subject-change)

Dave and others,

Improving the use of face-to-face time is very important.  In Routing,
we've done WG Chair training on project management (
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/WGChairTraining ) as well as
having several discussions during our WG Chair Chats.

One aspect that helps is figuring out what is needed to move the milestones
of the WG forward and ask for those discussions.  Figuring out what
discussions need face-to-face time, encouraging good discussions on the
mailing list, and using virtual interims for targeted discussions that are
not resolving on the mailing list - all are good techniques to help better
manage the face-to-face meeting time.

However, we ask our WG chairs to guess how much time will be needed so a
schedule can be done - before new draft versions are even submitted.  It's
hard when new work can materialize and there can be a tendency for
just-in-time draft writing and meeting request time.

One can encourage that presentations be reviewed by WG Chairs before the WG
meeting and improved - but if those aren't provided, it's a chair judgement
call as to whether have the draft discussion go forward.

Sometimes, people only get around to it right before the deadline - and
don't realize the cascading harm that causes.

We have excellent WG chairs - but they do not work in a vacuum.

Regards,
Alia

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote:

>
> > Furthermore, solving the problem that we are making poor use of time
> > during IETF f2f meetings by cramming the agenda with yet another
> > interval when we don’t have a break is not going to solve the problem.
>
>
> This is the only interesting aspect of this thread:  ignoring the
> underlying problem, in favor of creating new ones.
>
>
> d/
>
> --
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net
>
>

[93attendees] making better uses of IETF f2f time Alia Atlas
Re: [93attendees] making better uses of IETF f2f … Ted Lemon
Re: [93attendees] making better uses of IETF f2f … Alia Atlas
Re: [93attendees] making better uses of IETF f2f … Dave Crocker