Re: [Recentattendees] Remote Participation for IETF 95: Meetecho Details

John C Klensin <> Thu, 31 March 2016 18:29 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69D4E12D723 for <>; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 11:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B9axqwlFRLzP for <>; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 11:29:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 102FA12D68E for <>; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 11:29:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( by with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <>) id 1alhLM-0004bc-Kp; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 14:29:20 -0400
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 14:29:15 -0400
From: John C Klensin <>
To: Melinda Shore <>,
Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] Remote Participation for IETF 95: Meetecho Details
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on; SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 18:29:24 -0000

--On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 16:37 -0800 Melinda Shore
<> wrote:

> On 3/30/16 12:22 PM, IETF Secretariat wrote:
>> 1. Individuals are required to register for the meeting to
>> observe or participate via Meetecho.
> I'm not sure I understand this correctly.  Does this mean
> that somebody is going to have to register after the meeting
> to be able to watch archived recordings?  That doesn't
> seem correct.  If it's not correct, why does someone have
> to register to passively watch a session?  Will the standalone
> audio streams still be available during sessions?

See separate, related, note, but add to Melinda's questions:

A registration requirement for remote participants is a major
policy change and one for people who merely want to passively
observe is something I believe the community has several times
concluded is inappropriate given privacy, etc., concerns.  So,
who made this decision and how?  Unless the answer involves a
community discussion and Last Call or equivalent process that I
missed (and apparently Melinda did too), if the answer to "who
decided" involves anyone in the IETF Leadership, would they
please offer to resign?

If it isn't clear, despite advocating for remote participant
registration for years (and being clearly in the rough), I think
this way of handling and announcing the decision is outrageous.