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

Vinayak Hegde <vinayakh@gmail.com> Tue, 19 April 2016 20:43 UTC

Return-Path: <vinayakh@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D43FC12E03D for <diversity@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:43:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id otXfv9W55vVj for <diversity@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:43:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x236.google.com (mail-wm0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8E3612DD1B for <diversity@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x236.google.com with SMTP id n3so49916111wmn.0 for <diversity@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=qrbzQhte/ewRoAZwSu/pXH5r8LBwGOMStUN4emFz4AI=; b=Mw5GbDkjofEAxveYP0bjIGhiyRGYaQjFEiJqRHpqPTscHSQoD1xwd+l4P8KCV9O5kG QLQx2t/9h457zXdtB1w4XqHTrRjROSTaSh/IoytXzBhZWE6p0VGbp5/awE8Uszdwtv8a 9Hs36FjwK0HqCiadFN+tUSupCgHapt4Qh23RYcL1P0qGJ0WaNN89osbIrQ/FYGzS2CGg iyFwJVG+13zMIxsQkoBjNDIbftVI6ndYq3slFMql673mQYz7EzmmemlsMmb31grhAr3l zAq7pGoN2dIzW1y3DdyvjURyCnrujw9oVbG9kuP1mxe3gMSTgoSX8YkHOTi//tLWn9NE 7n/w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=qrbzQhte/ewRoAZwSu/pXH5r8LBwGOMStUN4emFz4AI=; b=mVIWxVqad8DCemUGzL4nsxDcixIykfjhv9a7PazSrbxwylchW8KBQdY9q3GMHZsvmd lBI2W33iBNFaswv1+ZD1+AUb6OBM059U00mCFaJy5zLH+BEgQJ5DouXUk5RHp2XmxRmX JmrkP4vrM37VK61rg4GoGUGP15ZvQw5vrhN87Sg5MClJtBdAoLfdRc5qEPhuT4CxOUZx zDMI//ZYLzJZ5xVq/rPIXS4emuZXOZX5LcRrAcmFYIYoSjvGrrXyPLWQ6dQkkMvD+UE9 knQqlG8drDY7A8gqvYdct51hrlGBBTQ+bRILW8nhTCekwAKsSPFE2YdjyqEfRBDEKjyv XsQA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVo8DixmudIYaeBmQ7UFa2I2DFD9E9pGuO+OjwdiNkqhSfzTUZrnvYGNbzYNd3/hSkQm/OvC6Yww36HhQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.192.106 with SMTP id hf10mr4860749wjc.134.1461098625461; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:43:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.133.99 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:43:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20160419123834.10702b38@resistor.net>
References: <57151C55.30206@gmail.com> <746128222.2295531.1461009032633.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20160418172423.1071c670@resistor.net> <CAKe6YvOr46TT+sdrgmLA1mpqpFsDDkyLQS=XA21RD+bSfd4G4A@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20160419082036.0eadf038@resistor.net> <CAKe6YvPG1u_gDdib692M78pYPHqLLhReSr9K00q6GL7y7GVyrA@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20160419123834.10702b38@resistor.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 02:13:45 +0530
Message-ID: <CAKe6YvMfsnF8ViA=mjFkE4b-Z=ZWwYzyPs3oE4_h9nv8EdB9zQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Vinayak Hegde <vinayakh@gmail.com>
To: SM <sm@resistor.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/aj0FNq2gGTOgEDGGvOID54LpsOY>
Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" <diversity@ietf.org>, Nalini Elkins <nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com>, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Participation in active IETF work (was: Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration)
X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diversity open mailing list <diversity.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/diversity>, <mailto:diversity-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/diversity/>
List-Post: <mailto:diversity@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:diversity-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity>, <mailto:diversity-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:43:50 -0000

Replies inline
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 2:01 AM, SM <sm@resistor.net> wrote:
> Hi Vinayak,
> At 12:05 19-04-2016, Vinayak Hegde wrote:
>>
>> Yes & No. YMMV everyone is different. Some people are very happy
>> contributing remotely and physical meetings might not matter as much
>> to them. But this subset is small. I would guess for most people a
>> physical meeting still helps a lot. On the other end of the spectrum
>> there might be people who have come multiple times and have not
>> contributed much or are not as active.
>>
>> I think it is getting easier to contribute (for someone who wants to),
>> thanks to meetecho, remote presentations, wider diversity of meeting
>> venues (due to 1:1:1:1*) and various trainings and mentoring that is
>> available now. But all said and done IMHO, being at a meeting still is
>> a quite different experience (due to physical presence, bumping into
>> people - serendipity, focus and facetime)
>
> I read your answer as meaning that non-participation from developing
> countries (or non-participation from people who do not work for large
> companies) does not affect IETF work.

Nope I am arguing the opposite. But I am saying it is becoming easier
to contribute remotely (if you have attended a few meetings or sometimes
even if you haven't).

> A meeting in, for example, Europe, allows a participant in Europe to present
> his/her draft.  I don't know whether that (type of) participant sees remote
> presentation facilities (meetecho) as a workable alternative.  I could not
> find any first-hand information about Africa, Asia or South America.  Please
> comment if you are residing in any of those regions and you tried to attend
> an IETF meeting to present a draft.

Yes. I reside in India (Asia). Attending a meeting does help you present and
progress your draft. In Yokohama - IETF 94, I tried presenting remotely and the
experience was unexpectedly good.

Yes. Attending meeting is always preferable and funding is a challenge.

> I agree that for most people, attending a meeting in person helps a lot.
> There is the funding problem which affects people from developing countries.
> If, for example, we compare this with the ITU, national governments provide
> funding to attend ITU meetings.

Yeah.

-- Vinayak