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

["Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)" <[e-mail]>]

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:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2023 9:00 PM
To: Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>; Mark Nottingham <mnot=[e-mail]>; Francesca Palombini <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
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.