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

Abdussalam Baryun <> Wed, 20 April 2016 15:20 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A22E612F041 for <>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 08:20:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 kJG9kl_APxyO for <>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 08:20:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 872B812EF7B for <>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 08:16:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id v14so30538127qge.0 for <>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 08:16:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=oDYpG4lLyrhJQQNSmdDfBfDIhfF4hB95spXs0emieHI=; b=egbg0HNx4d1nFqjVTwhXahuTnErj3aT6mgKKf3pJr/q5cp3pi+MC/cwgceyJHY7NTA Vd5+THBDdYvFEdtz7YnnL1NoML2irZL/g8X/qaIZFF0HhS8mcDSlmonSkRpYT6ZE9nbr sGy1KHit57hQRnps89S/QW7pIFAz4phBXucZBilgoSj+0hQkd1uhyWTb0PS46a8da9/7 dgXIY+v8wuXzNPy5ScHvka80D2He6Z+92QuEKGkUmvUel5KhTCAX4FvdhcemshGAvYsL dIFPLKHgOx2v8Ll72wZFYQse3IQg0uG5HmSUJhyYSE5z9rn/RA96MSURoJY/x/qyDQ4m gsAA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=oDYpG4lLyrhJQQNSmdDfBfDIhfF4hB95spXs0emieHI=; b=CkRIb6B7ivUrnmrWP74FvPyQhL8rAGPKexhlCSHFi2RjmbZVK0zzoAZZS8YC7mjGSv S7LFCNwS7V/38AVpfSE/tdq6JuUEpzGPV1xMk27DjdiGKB6pIbMgRBWdVvvG4R2wVVf7 XANxDmiEOIQv0crTbpYioX5tcf5QqAamBuWg7sk6SFYXjUJsT6YQakUhLZimWvgO+VMQ c1tFCqKgLB2bpaetjO2V9/OzHNUM04hMF6GGtSfmwfpHeZJqQb5bvf3TAW5EMQ9sJhcc jauFXocT4HSvbw4QIwejkFSfcFpRM/0Pn9dvSjvzHJhWFMqXmph8proQ2s7EL0w/0iO1 QaZQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWGQU1v6nS5T/BaCcLJPffBeerDgh5Us1KmFakFzPwROAEP8go6snST1PSBXOP+2pm9r+ny04B54qAJGg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id 33mr11591376qgy.47.1461165373678; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 08:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 08:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 17:16:13 +0200
Message-ID: <>
From: Abdussalam Baryun <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113a9a640e70a90530ec13bd
Archived-At: <>
Cc: Hui Deng <>, Dhruv Dhody <>, "" <>, Christian O'Flaherty <>, Alvaro Retana <>, SM <>, 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 15:20:40 -0000

Hi Nalini

Thanks alot. I had a great mentor (mentoring remotely) in 2013. I had
started in IETF discussions remotely from about 4 or 5 years (before the
mentoring program) it was a disaster but I kept good discussions. The
problem I faced was that I needed a mentor that is a participant in the WG
I am working in and I found that the best practical solution is having
mentors per WG not per region. However, I am happy we have mentors per
region which is good and I will work that we have mentors per WG as well. I
hope the IETF general area looks into this issue as well.

Best Regards,


On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 5:06 PM, <> wrote:

> >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!
> Nalini
> IETF 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.
> Regards,
> -sm
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list