Re: [Coin] Cancelling the COINRG meeting at IETF113

["Schooler, Eve M" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Dirk, All,

My apologies about the ambiguity in the comment about the agenda. It was intended to convey that we struggled to have a FULL agenda, and NOT to pass judgement on the quality of the topics that might have been presented. Of the individuals we reached out to present, many stated the day/timing simply did not work out.

As for transparency…If you are a regular reader of this list, then it is painfully obvious that there has been quite a bit of divisiveness happening both on and off the list. As chairs, given the state of the agenda and the tone of the dialog, we felt the need to take a step back from the vitriol and simply take a deep breath to regroup.

We certainly have valued the continued involvement of the COIN community, which has made many of the discussions vibrant and rewarding.

Best regards,
Eve

From: Coin <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Dirk Trossen
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2022 10:30 PM
To: Marie-Jose Montpetit <[e-mail]>; coin <[e-mail]>
Cc: coinrg-chairs <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Coin] Cancelling the COINRG meeting at IETF113

Hi J/E/M, all,

Now that’s a surprise, not just in content but also in style since the RG community lacks the transparency of this decision.

As a COIN RG member myself for now more than 3 years (spanning two organizations), I had looked forward to discussing at least three activities in which I am involved in, namely the (i) use case advances (trying to formulate and categorize the pertinent research questions in a number of COIN areas), (ii) the applicability of SDN for routing (i.e. the use of DP programmability for realizing novel routing solutions, which according to the chairs is in scope of COIN), and (iii) a discussion on how COIN could help improve on DLT realizations; all activities resulting from research on topics I see as relevant to and within COIN.

So this gives already three agenda items from where I’m coming from (depending on willingness for time allocation, between about 45 to 60mins on an agenda in my mind) but yet we are told at ‘we cannot put a good agenda together’. Is there nothing beyond these items, really, and/or is this a judgement of those items in quality (I would expect good discussions on them but maybe it is just me)?

So I’m disappointed but also shocked by this style of simply cancelling the RG meeting with that (too) thin ‘we cannot put a good agenda together for IETF113’ explanation. I cannot and do not see the reasoning behind it albeit I may speculate but I am not a friend of those second guesses.

Hence, I would ask the community here: what discussions were we looking forward to have? Are those good enough to discuss regardless of the RG meeting being cancelled? If there is no RG meeting for whatever reason, maybe we can simply come together among those interested in those discussions and have them regardless, such as in a side meeting of the ‘COIN community’ (not the RG)?

From my side, I would be highly interested in that since I have valued the COIN discussions over the past years and don’t want to let go of this for reasons that are just not well enough explained below.

Best,

Dirk

From: Coin [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Marie-Jose Montpetit
Sent: 11 March 2022 00:45
To: coin <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: coinrg-chairs <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: [Coin] Cancelling the COINRG meeting at IETF113

Dear all:

Because of many converging issues, delays and (non) availability of invited researchers and papers we cannot put a good agenda together for IETF113.  Hence we are cancelling the meeting.

We plan to re-group, consult the community and plan for 114.

Discussions on the use cases and other important COIN topics will have to continue or be initiated on the list for now. Of course as the co-author of a draft that was going to be presented I am disappointed.

The co-chairs are in full agreement that this is the right decision at this point and the IRTF leadership has been kept in the loop.

J/E/M

Marie-José Montpetit, Ph.D.
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>