Re: Poster sessions

Firstly, I agree: as a general rule, to get official floor space of
any kind at the IETF venue, you SHOULD have posted a draft. If there
is no draft, that is exactly when you need a bar BOF. (Complicated joke
about the height of the bar for a bar BOF, and the drafts to be drunk,
goes here.)

Second, a number of operators' meetings have a session for "lightning
talks" with minimal formality. But in practice, we have that at most
Area Meetings - post a relevant draft, ask the ADs for a 5 minute slot,
and you usually get it.

So I'm not sure that we have a gap in our options. I'm more likely
to read a draft with an interesting title than to walk around
reading hard-copy posters.

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

On 2011-01-07 09:16, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote:
> ________________________________________
> From: Sam Hartman [hartmans-ietf@mit.edu]
> 
> I think the bar of producing an internet draft is low
> enough.  Regardless of what mechanisms we adopt to give people a chance
> to try and sell their drafts, I think it is critical that we require the
> drafts to be written.
> ________________________________________
> 
> Actually, the bar for writing an I-D is near zero, so it should not be a barrier to presenting
> any idea, no matter how half-baked.  A more significant effect is that an I-D is in text form
> rather than poster form so it tends to direct the writer to a more thought-through presentation.
> 
> But most importantly, an I-D is globally available and globally announced, whereas a poster
> session at an IETF meeting would be inherently limited to those physically present, which is biased
> toward frequent attendees, those with sponsorship from large organizations, and those from the
> developed world.  Historically, the IETF has tried to limit biases in favor of those groups.
> 
> Dale
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 