Re: In person versus virtual?

Tim Chown <tjc.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 11 March 2020 12:07 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc.ietf@gmail.com>
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 77FA13A17E3 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 05:07:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=gmail.com
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 F3RQ-gHH_1sx for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 05:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x435.google.com (mail-wr1-x435.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::435]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A4393A17E2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 05:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x435.google.com with SMTP id 6so2287167wre.4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 05:07:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=cbPvzWk35FEBV6+Gvbh20uehlwtR8eU/8JxyQg0PcRM=; b=p/ATwGB+8A6zDeJZIEBovCV8adlmj6wL9ffbPXTxp4/1KVCoj+latl1CbuJ7uptxHG QuzLxng2ArF8lnbPAiEInlg4WX30xWlFqpK2z4scTmcHD5zgypFo1LlzBsmamVDhLdnY mb+vtV49rfUU/+YZqLHKrZBFuOLtaPKu6DmfXUlek8gseP31IA/0v2YjnZr4PavNYWtZ cr6gXSZKANxQ0Fzge6T2aPRBut4iyifSOfL5jOoAFUiRvrJhhguVKJCUsyTccufCUegs bt8tSUxmdZ5l/O1vOACSd4CeZ5/uCnrU6M8AS9aeTRmeZuB2r13Pd1WuLhEt9ZUR6oNL i6Xw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=cbPvzWk35FEBV6+Gvbh20uehlwtR8eU/8JxyQg0PcRM=; b=bBkX9KKkIocVu4Midm7gDoPqcTQHVnpV7+5ai8Y95ltQmMTQ7rc/7fDquGpnciwKmk rJdmiKB+az9aVY1EEMBD/3ifgSmd6UrNAC/TFTZEGJWWs9SGBJ+Z+oCSZmvXDd7XSPsX j7KtAD9AM7U118WnkA7l/ILwEo11SknGxpBJ6sqcrnX6JegszLPWq6ghTj5wPwNaOUeS CGvRVWRME1AijN+NEm6IG7DYeTNvfLIFxcJqTy8nGeDn3buQ1AXyQ+uvTostMWac9xZ7 A2EEmBnzhXyy8BaWzBymkWtpsl3E2sCDZ09bZ5N9vJcP2K0qeIvxvBLwzBQzWZgxtJR7 XUbA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1onQ04OZxnYcd6vK5zZqtS2VHd5JbvOqTcEvRSCBDW5j9uYrIp wcPoFd5Wti2roEZoWGrwb4c=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: =?utf-8?q?ADFU+vsLRucakyN05OYIEt9+UB7hCPcT6DpknBjyFBHO?= =?utf-8?q?Mp53qowfuEfkFxT+4alCfZm+xOQuMOTryA=3D=3D?=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4685:: with SMTP id u5mr4038780wrq.69.1583928429548; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 05:07:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.99.195.88] ([94.118.66.55]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l83sm8359865wmf.43.2020.03.11.05.07.08 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 11 Mar 2020 05:07:09 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\))
Subject: Re: In person versus virtual?
From: Tim Chown <tjc.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CB06C93B-56BE-41F7-BB97-2146752B38F2@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:07:06 +0000
Cc: Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug@acm.org>, ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <CA6C4C62-48AD-4649-B415-EE75E86E35B1@gmail.com>
References: <158386742797.16091.1025684270011519738@ietfa.amsl.com> <ee2c28db-5b83-3f9c-bfb5-adbacdce6fc4@acm.org> <92890c4b-c109-d0f4-e6b7-c06a9d6a696c@acm.org> <88e61108-6bb3-0bac-d6f1-d5a0f7ffa538@joelhalpern.com> <96e3b1c7-b187-7c9e-4be1-0e82fee719c1@acm.org> <CB06C93B-56BE-41F7-BB97-2146752B38F2@cisco.com>
To: Eliot Lear <lear=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Eectv9CguTRUErLZEQcCboernL4>
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: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:07:13 -0000

> On 11 Mar 2020, at 07:40, Eliot Lear <lear=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> You may be referring to a draft I wrote, draft-lear-we-gotta-stop-meeting-like-this-00.txt, or maybe to comments made by others in various IETF threads. 
> 
> My intuition tells me we should probably not meet 3x per year in person, but something less, like 2x, if for no other reason, to save the environment.  But my intuition is not enough to make good decisions.  It seems to me that some data is required, which is why I wrote that draft.  Let’s get data, in order to understand what are the most effective collaboration modalities for this organization.
> 
> I was aiming for an experiment some years down the road, but here we are.  Let’s make the most of it and collect what data we can.

I think two physical meetings leaving more room for two virtual meetings per WG in between would be a good path to follow.  Less travel, less carbon, and perhaps four draft deadlines that way rather than three, spreading the work over the year better.

Tim