Re: virtual-only wgs?
Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Sun, 19 May 2019 08:00 UTC
Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 489A312007A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 May 2019 01:00:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 LCgZHFUtvLfa for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 May 2019 01:00:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1816120072 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 May 2019 01:00:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.13] (unknown [119.94.160.32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8E46A33F5AF; Sun, 19 May 2019 10:00:13 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: virtual-only wgs?
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <F24B0AF4-AA00-461E-BD3D-9E0AB9FA4261@gmail.com> <B75BB59A-80EE-46BB-A921-4A2D87591AAF@gmail.com> <28447.1558219585@localhost>
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Message-ID: <c6590655-54cb-f90f-2b2c-0a4091310199@pi.nu>
Date: Sun, 19 May 2019 15:58:25 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <28447.1558219585@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/-y_CKLt7S76YDjvo2jDNUbCzYuM>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 May 2019 08:00:20 -0000
Michael, Bob, all, On 2019-05-19 06:46, Michael Richardson wrote: > > Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Can anyone tell me whether our standards process allows for > >> virtual-only working groups? In other words, could a working group > >> choose to stop meeting at IETF venues and only convene online? > > > As many folks have said, this is possible and has been done. > > However, as a follow-on question, could there be a working forming BOF that is virtual? > > I think that this has happened, but I don't have an existence proof. > > I know that WGs have been formed without in-person BOFs, and I suspect it > resulted from a few email conversations, and some well written charters. > Whether there were informal phone calls or unofficial virtual interim > meetings, I don't know. I guess we could run a working group, as long as there is a solid rough consensus on what should be done, based on virtual meetings or entirely on a wg mailing list. Same for a BoFs. However we all know that working groups frequently run into issues that needs to be discussed f2f. Same for BoFs. I don't think that we ever can charter a working group that is not allowed to hold f2f meetings at an IETF meeting. I also think that wg chairs in such a wg must be quite liberal listening to request for f2f meetings. > > Our rules say you don't have to have a BOF. Well, yes IESG can form a working group as soon as it is convinced that there is work to be done and enough people interested in doing this work. Now, the BoFs are there to investigate those two issues. BoFs are useful, but not always necessary. /Loa > > -- > Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works > -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > > > -- Loa Andersson email: loa@pi.nu Senior MPLS Expert Bronze Dragon Consulting phone: +46 739 81 21 64
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Eliot Lear (elear)
- virtual-only wgs? Aaron Falk
- Re: virtual-only wgs? John C Klensin
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Randy Presuhn
- Re: virtual-only wgs? S Moonesamy
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Keith Moore
- Re: virtual-only wgs? John C Klensin
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Ted Lemon
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Mark Nottingham
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Russ Housley
- Re: virtual-only wgs? John C Klensin
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Mark Nottingham
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Martin Thomson
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Aaron Falk
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Keith Moore
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Michael Richardson
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Bob Hinden
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Aaron Falk
- Re: virtual-only wgs? John C Klensin
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Jared Mauch
- Re: virtual-only wgs? S Moonesamy
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Michael Richardson
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Loa Andersson
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Alissa Cooper
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Bob Hinden
- Re: virtual-only wgs? Donald Eastlake