Re: [Diversity] Participation in active IETF work (was: Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration)

<> Wed, 20 April 2016 15:07 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA5C12E3C8 for <>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 08:07:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.619
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.619 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1cl1CLkxy0BM for <>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 08:07:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D482912E2B2 for <>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 08:07:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=s2048; t=1461164820; bh=DfKr463jBou6rEp0nxAqjvt8NUbmgQl6w2E4klJ+598=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:Subject; b=bDzbi1fGlAhl45k16sF7c6syxKF3AUwCMehKwNKBc2QlOEYNKwnBnxaB1tjPsu6h72spAsVpu9bSGt1TE6DfnHRRV83DCpQa5gH9PAnkZrRx4BXpdt5+7AVnbFMnQXnGX8IY4mWhSbsr/j/SQUlooo7By6TXQyOyRRoSKbbmRKnnmEmPPWw+9sMeswwPYU9lc9pqBv5+lvNqMiO32kwcu6t8ZiVdHGGz93w8v9wgVcqWATiv5GUQEilibd4cX6DFaUBtPvH3DYaNqlBI+Ujul3MD4m1gq3zxo3yGIDSBGGfsRz13Tz7ib6Qx+hvAVwY2bupl6MNyd9UomjSG6nHYHg==
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 20 Apr 2016 15:07:00 -0000
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 20 Apr 2016 15:07:00 -0000
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 20 Apr 2016 15:07:00 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-YMail-OSG: wEJcDOIVM1mOOE3.u0aR70ZYPZFkM07WaFg.7KFhMFfedkk_xtCeMgT2DWMLSRS PG5pT3EDVgnPDKfEsp6lVQv52zjdMJxhOQo7ea5sJgpYxBORtWt_I2X1g9wFL7v_2CB__XFs94qU 37SblnEAAJaMAo.8CG4iFf8GyWxweImatBLahoXTJLtcnkh4hCIVk2FgUyOXRDMqfP7EocF.bYzh G3dtz544IMEF0W4_fjLXSPSytFHjgOnXWT8zFDqVcYApAcwF64RLDcyIqJ57ihAx46C.umQ1D9uD M.83eqT5XnsHwtCv7SQW_pn6IctQgnRjegYxg78DL.o076D9cYjVn_EbE_dR1IGtywhzAhTGIWh5 ztNdry5xuKzxqLbE.lSP.13qULf95ZImHq4lgu_xD7WhN1hpJdioQuQ8X313PFQ7D_ncgmSJjdp6 909Gblio3aTVt26ey1QVLPPl_Q3K7G9bD2b_fAo1WniJ.q7vWKqu._TjPbq0Q3l6DXlXIduqjgIe OZoTqwMPx2fZ3q3H80sJoCeLFjyrtui6H
Received: by; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:06:59 +0000
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:06:58 +0000 (UTC)
From: <>
To: Abdussalam Baryun <>, SM <>
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_3379726_324697370.1461164818947"
Archived-At: <>
Cc: Hui Deng <>, Dhruv Dhody <>, "" <>, Christian O'Flaherty <>, Alvaro Retana <>, Vinayak Hegde <>
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Participation in active IETF work (was: Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diversity open mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:07:03 -0000

>Thanks for your email. My opinion is that the IETF needs to work harder on these issues. IMHO, the problem is mainly that mentors are still in few numbers, and the IETF needs to look >into the IETF culture or better to say their WG culture. I recommend we need one or two mentors for each WG, so the mentor MUST not be the Chair or AD, the mentor MUST be a >participant in that WG (better if he/she was a Chair before).
 Abdussalam, thanks for your comments.  As head of the IETF Mentoring Team, we actually have quite a few mentors.   In fact, far more mentors than mentees.  Also, if we need mentors from a particular Working Group, I ask the WG and people are very generous with their time.   (For which, I thank everyone!)
Are you speaking of remote mentors or regional mentors?
What would you like the mentoring program to do?   We welcome suggestions!  
NaliniIETF Mentoring Team

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:58 AM, SM <> wrote:

Hi Nalini,
At 12:50 18-04-2016, wrote:

I wonder if there has not been more participation in active IETF work before from other regions because there was no structured way to start participating and language insensitivity.  (BTW, there is a new member of the Mentoring Team from Latin America, that I met in Buenos Aires who will translate the Mentoring emails into Spanish.)

Attendance figures were used as a substitute for Participation figures. The IETF Community did not show much interest in doing anything about that.  A few years ago, an IAOC Chair posted the following to justify the meeting policy:

There wasn't any formal effort (as the one you are doing) to train people from other regions to start participating except for the meeting training sessions.  A person who is not used to discussing in English faces a higher learning curve in comparison with someone from Australia.

The regional mentors (in the Cc) might be able to comment about why there has not been more active participation before.

diversity mailing list