Re: Meeting rotation (was Hotel situation)

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Sat, 19 December 2015 19:34 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0796C1A910B for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:34:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.663
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.663 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 WbFZKaOETlEj for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:34:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3C671A910A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:34:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 2469 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2015 19:34:18 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2015 19:34:18 -0000
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 19:33:56 -0000
Message-ID: <20151219193356.28371.qmail@ary.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Meeting rotation (was Hotel situation)
In-Reply-To: <4B81FA54-F79C-42CB-8024-1C653B0C9406@cisco.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/B3Act4Lb0yBDoupbad_nl_BS-l4>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 19:34:21 -0000

>Let me ask, since you clearly have opinions on such matters - what would you think of such
>an arrangement? What am I missing in such a proposal?

I think it would be a fine idea to return to venues that have worked
well in the past.  On the other hand, in nine years I will be 70 years
old and it is not clear to me how involved I will be in the IETF in
2024.

We do need to think about outreach and bringing in new people, but
given the way the IETF works, where meetings are almost entirely
working sessions, people at the sessions are expected to have done
their homework and know something about the topic, and tutorials in WG
meetings are generally considered to be a poor use of limited time, it
doesn't seem to me that the physical meetings are a particularly good
way to bring in people who aren't already reading the mailing lists.

R's,
John