Re: Registration details for IETF 108

Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> Mon, 01 June 2020 18:06 UTC

Return-Path: <csp@csperkins.org>
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 2F6CF3A13BE for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 11:06:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=csperkins.org
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 0GbF80Pw9dAG for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 11:06:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from haggis.mythic-beasts.com (haggis.mythic-beasts.com [IPv6:2a00:1098:0:86:1000:0:2:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF06B3A13B4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 11:06:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=csperkins.org; s=mythic-beasts-k1; h=To:Date:From:Subject; bh=90blLVck52VekGaTQuqabWR8nbXIuZ7aBwub6mGvfvA=; b=Mir+WmckKNn/MawmhRXw2bgFqU oZEuu+RLVwQ+Jpt5Q/hX1RMAOfbRWbMv0buIv86Jl+IBOt9Nw2FG2iONVB/Dz/l+oETPImwF78oCc IrDzb9PSmUNCFbSIJq8iIuN3dSJ+6k0KAc7hyL85+WTqJPPAbJIoW0TQqAloh2LqXSntwY+VxhTZW a0QTO3ABTEerqR2HEJp3gdxkcDdXKrAL7ntDLBdvIbPf2hE4zTUJ3688rEwQBruas6MNUZxSpMZPE OF27jmAwFiCSbgo1y/cMwDlFcRQWmb+4WvD+SlqeAhY2PNB/uycMmX3cPcuimALsQBrImrpUfyL85 TsrMSY9w==;
Received: from [81.187.2.149] (port=48688 helo=[192.168.0.80]) by haggis.mythic-beasts.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from <csp@csperkins.org>) id 1jfopf-0000uA-45; Mon, 01 Jun 2020 19:06:43 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.14\))
Subject: Re: Registration details for IETF 108
From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
In-Reply-To: <D6AF5131729C554EA66DD64D@PSB>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 19:06:39 +0100
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9EBBAFA9-EAA5-4578-84E3-429052CE3F62@csperkins.org>
References: <159062833754.6110.5826748635235943562@ietfa.amsl.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20200531121457.0b249858@elandnews.com> <CABcZeBOzVHaSZa0A3eDz12RwNuCiHtiJL8wqvAhhLPN6YEQOkQ@mail.gmail.com> <afa11959-3348-4054-409c-803824a2f332@gmail.com> <D6AF5131729C554EA66DD64D@PSB>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.14)
X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: 4
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Ddpz82pZt3ugH7IUpvY0AJ-mf9w>
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: Mon, 01 Jun 2020 18:06:48 -0000

> On 1 Jun 2020, at 17:44, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:
> 
> Having read the survey results and having been suggesting for
> many years that remote participants (note participants, not
> observers/lurkers) should be charged at least a nominal fee, I
> agree with all of those who have said that charging something is
> reasonable.   I have three concerns that are, in increasing
> order of importance below.  While not trivial, I hope that
> neither of the first two become a distraction.
...
> (3) While I note that almost every posting since Melinda's
> comments excerpted below has concentrated on the fees, I think
> she has identified the important issue.  We continue to claim
> that decisions are made --not just checked or last-called -- on
> mailing lists, but that seems factually to have become less true
> in recent years.  Like her, I believe that the trend may be
> irreversible at this point.  However, unless there is some plan
> to try to at least partially mitigate the effects of that
> change, I think it is important that we recognize and make
> adjustments for, not only the incoherency and inconsistencies
> she points out, but the changes that dilute the "decisions on
> mailing lists" principle.  We should also recognize that
> diluting that principle inevitably has negative effects on the
> diversity of experience and expertise -- not just demographic
> diversity although there might be effects there too-- that end
> up being represented in IETF decision-making.

One of the key results of the survey was that time zones are hard, and make scheduling calls to be inclusive very difficult.

I’m not sure mailing lists are necessarily still the right technology, but I do hope that manycouches, and related discussions, will include a focus on effective asynchronous collaboration, and that we won’t fall by default into the mode of endless teleconferences at unsociable hours. 

Colin