Re: [arch-d] [Chirp] on the nature of architecture discussion (was: Re: Fwd: IETF 107 Vancouver In-Person Meeting Cancelled)

[Toerless Eckert <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 05:44:24PM +0100, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> > I am complaining about the absence of a recurring, IAB organized
> > architecture-discuss/dispatch meeting slot at IETF meetings.
> 
> Ok, I think I now get  what you're after. Not sure I'm
> convinced it'd be worthwhile, but if people wanted to
> try that, then saying so, and I guess suggesting topics
> to cover would be the things to do I guess. Then the
> IAB could think about that input and whether such
> sessions might be a good idea or not.

Thanks. As i said, a one-off will not succeed, but there should
be the will to think/work on improving this through experience.

Asking for submissions to be sent out earlier (even 1 month)
to allow for pre-meeting vetting for example is a good step. Assigning
designated reviewers might even be better. Lets experiment.
We all know how more difficult these broader topic discussions
are, but we have done very little experimentation in the
past trying to improve.


Also, wrt. IAB workshops and the like:

- The co-location of IRTF work into IETF weeks is i think very
  successful for that community. I wish the IAB would consider
  this option more. 
- With corona/virtual meetings we should IMHO simply have a joint,
  integrated IRTF/IAB/IETF activities calender over e.g.: a period of one
  "virtual" meeting month and use the same/inified tooling/publishing mechanisms.
  That gives contributors  hopefully the same attendance cross-polination opportunity
  as the physcial IETF week.

Cheers
    Toerless

> S.
> 
> > 
> > If we had this, then you could indicate that 'chirp' contributions are
> > a preferred topic to be presented/discussed in such a track.
> > 
> > You do encourage contributions by giving them these incentices:
> > recurring meeting with longer time horizon: ability to plan putting cycles
> > into a contribution. Present in a larger context of an arch-discuss
> > track == reach out to more opportunistic participants.
> > 
> > Cheers
> >     Toerless
> > 
> > On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 04:32:05PM +0100, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> >>
> >> Hiya,
> >>
> >> On 02/04/2020 16:27, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> >>> Why not ?
> >>
> >> I'd be really happy to organise a meeting for chirp. [1]
> >> If people want one, just mail me or that list.
> >>
> >> But, I asked on the list already, as I just said, and
> >> only 1 person was interested, so I'm very puzzled as
> >> to what it is you are complaining about.
> >>
> >> S.
> >>
> >> [1] https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/chirp
> >>
> >>
> > 
> > pub   RSA 4096/7B172BEA 2017-12-22 Stephen Farrell (2017) <[e-mail]>
> >> sub   RSA 4096/36CB8BB6 2017-12-22
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 

pub   RSA 4096/7B172BEA 2017-12-22 Stephen Farrell (2017) <[e-mail]>
> sub   RSA 4096/36CB8BB6 2017-12-22
> 




> _______________________________________________
> Architecture-discuss mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss


-- 
---
[e-mail]