Re: [dispatch] IETF 118 - do you have something for DISPATCH?

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Tue, 24 October 2023 02:42 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BBDAC1519A7; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 19:42:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b="Uxc3hpQS"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b="orIhsJ0N"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id noncHwTyyJXH; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 19:42:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE89AC1519B3; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 19:42:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A0FD32009B0; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 22:42:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 23 Oct 2023 22:42:17 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h=cc :cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t= 1698115336; x=1698201736; bh=RGVM5FxeQHiVwXOcIa16Ov6ekbqR0wV1AkD HgUU1QFM=; b=Uxc3hpQS2/6l6mdMtvTOzdSs0wh67Vk71AcXqlVrX6o+vA1GXdG JSrjftvT2M7xAzNsD1ltsD3CQvN5pJB1KPGGEutdg0TdoHo0ApNIaH9X0z3KJCc+ aJtHE4TnoaAQYOc0fCdidbXmrn16RbOLKy4t9mcEr07EHzIAWgi3wrbb+HWmK8mR wrs+OMOSAxW2p7uKh73obzcFS1OFhX3cR0MLopHntN0TZC3mH66ZBcA2ZqCZO7i+ BHF9cgwp4rsgamQ9Q3jPoo5llIL3R/sMjrBD4n1QoEc/HuQV7JxqPuOEVCILiABw B90UU49F3WlwaC+BELmO9nl5ixeNNhBcMRQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1698115336; x=1698201736; bh=RGVM5FxeQHiVwXOcIa16Ov6ekbqR0wV1AkD HgUU1QFM=; b=orIhsJ0N0Serv8MYd2hrUii6tmynnjcxf6GyNOSpYM+UH4E97ko 2hGwm9Dpp6GRjGxVpZnoWyb4BUhxvHhiUuSL5pnCWEmLyTIhX5eVml8tW7JNevgB t7frCNj3JpNtSouf8+QAhp21a9S/kaXka1SS6BpRhdDVYFItjbegJ3qCPBXlQ3kB JbBaS+NZJ/b0kLw4+6s3oHSkoo5Cuw8W2AKM0lOFQCYMdU3gP9xewwyOheEsYV9H jYlvQT4DdDuuQVsfj3FbTkjPjRoJ/7+OwBeTuoj1baczC116p9W+AeBNnAj+8bce Oh2SrSyF9+J7/pnCz/v4WtJ6AKqwpsQlthg==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:CC83ZV_U1qclLSU9KmoEwVMwtvu-o7ExFhQJj6wlxVwENEGivGhLHQ> <xme:CC83ZZviz-pwdTL4g3AHM3C6eXvthPa5LXJlvlwsLG60fTWirUzeC_1rmezxuaUWl wjbcvHic5SQ-WUp8A>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:CC83ZTAWXwgfpa7ehbPglsfH4gNsi0e5jKmuRDtr55__KkkdK1QyEIcIDtRkjl_nJFTZhEDXj65hja8UlLoZ2f4KgdiBNLGynBnCAqA35R5bqCZoztKiOScG>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvkedrkeejgdeitdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpegtggfuhfgjffevgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtjeenucfhrhhomhepofgrrhhk ucfpohhtthhinhhghhgrmhcuoehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvghtqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeefhffhleeljeejjeeikefhjeefieehteegjefghfdugeevieegheegffdttedu teenucffohhmrghinhepmhhnohhtrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenuc frrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvth
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:CC83ZZf-jlcGqFKZASX4vabAoaIEtYt9PGj93_nhRITOrR8l5mjIvg> <xmx:CC83ZaPUFaJq5RIK1wRl5D5S-KInep7mGgStdg6eyJQqg3e9f3C2ww> <xmx:CC83ZbmXgIGjcaUapcKx8NKkeURv0B71IECeS1HdYEzavu0fwMl0zg> <xmx:CC83ZWAPrtHZl1Z_49hv1SeB6Z163cEgRYe9XZ_TxFAWhmZ2OhMBeA>
Feedback-ID: ie6694242:Fastmail
Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 22:42:13 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.100.2.1.4\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <6bb01f9acc24409cb3a829f7d25aded0@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 13:42:11 +1100
Cc: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>, Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>, Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@ericsson.com>, "dispatch@ietf.org" <dispatch@ietf.org>, "dispatch-chairs@ietf.org" <dispatch-chairs@ietf.org>, "art-ads@ietf.org" <art-ads@ietf.org>, "tsv-ads@ietf.org" <tsv-ads@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <995F07E3-38A9-49A5-9091-2174899F4CFD@mnot.net>
References: <8866efbb55914ff3b3d2dac9ba52393f@huawei.com> <e7af4a430aeb42deb6f9de857d71b2f2@huawei.com> <258D2726-CF49-4675-8230-9548E2BD3E44@mnot.net> <AS1PR07MB86162B208AA31E4D08F30FD598D8A@AS1PR07MB8616.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <F7FEC59F-3264-43D2-8F32-DE4412263628@mnot.net> <bff6715c-0861-4647-96fb-385d21fbccaf@betaapp.fastmail.com> <755c1248-0d8a-6f1f-3c4e-9b0a732c3222@fastmail.fm> <6bb01f9acc24409cb3a829f7d25aded0@huawei.com>
To: "Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)" <pengshuping=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.100.2.1.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/0XAYqrGCHmVf012qjqk8lxoYrDc>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] IETF 118 - do you have something for DISPATCH?
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 02:42:27 -0000

That sounds very workable to me.

> On 24 Oct 2023, at 1:40 pm, Pengshuping (Peng Shuping) <pengshuping=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Maybe we could segment a single DISPATCH session into multiple parts, e.g. Cross-area, ART area, WIT area and SEC area, and allocate the received requests into each corresponding part. This allocation could be requested by the presenters or suggested by Chairs or Community in the mailing list. 
> 
> In the current dispatch agenda, we put time for each presentation to give people a rough indication about the session schedule, aiming to assist people to make their own time schedule.
> 
> If we've got more requests that cannot be held with one DISPATCH, then we could consider to request a couple of slots for DISPATCH in the IETF agenda. 
> 
> Shuping
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexey Melnikov [mailto:aamelnikov@fastmail.fm] 
> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2023 9:00 PM
> To: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>; Mark Nottingham <mnot=40mnot.net@dmarc.ietf.org>; Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@ericsson.com>
> Cc: dispatch@ietf.org; dispatch-chairs@ietf.org; art-ads@ietf.org; tsv-ads@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [dispatch] IETF 118 - do you have something for DISPATCH?
> 
> On 23/10/2023 11:39, Martin Thomson wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023, at 18:39, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>> I would strongly suggest that we combine SECDISPATCH into DISPATCH 
>>> and make its scope ART, WIT, and SEC. There is already too much venue 
>>> shopping / confusion between SECDISPATCH and DISPATCH, and adding a 
>>> third (which your message implies will be necessary) will only add to 
>>> the chaos. Getting cross-area review is very healthy at early stages.
>> I'd have to agree.  I've seen the same presentation at both DISPATCH and SECDISPATCH now on several occasions.  And one occasion where it was the same topic at both of those meetings and another working group.  A cross-area DISPATCH group seems like a good idea.
> (I would probably keep GENDISPATCH separate.)
> 
> I like this idea, but this probably means multiple DISPATCH sessions during an IETF week.
> 
> 
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/