Re: Proposed Experiment: More Meeting Time on Friday for IETF 73

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Fri, 18 July 2008 09:40 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15BA13A68A8; Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:40:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95EDB3A680E; Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:40:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.549
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mvS2aoZBRNm5; Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:40:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC0A23A67C1; Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.31,209,1215388800"; d="scan'208";a="14739478"
Received: from ams-dkim-2.cisco.com ([144.254.224.139]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Jul 2008 09:41:16 +0000
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150]) by ams-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m6I9fGV1026692; Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:41:16 +0200
Received: from xbh-ams-332.emea.cisco.com (xbh-ams-332.cisco.com [144.254.231.87]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m6I9fGK5003312; Fri, 18 Jul 2008 09:41:16 GMT
Received: from xfe-ams-331.emea.cisco.com ([144.254.231.72]) by xbh-ams-332.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:41:16 +0200
Received: from adsl-247-3-fixip.tiscali.ch ([10.61.82.151]) by xfe-ams-331.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:41:16 +0200
Message-ID: <4880653B.5040000@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:41:15 +0200
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird/3.0a2pre (Macintosh; 2008071703)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Proposed Experiment: More Meeting Time on Friday for IETF 73
References: <20080717213322.6B3F63A68B0@core3.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20080717213322.6B3F63A68B0@core3.amsl.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jul 2008 09:41:16.0183 (UTC) FILETIME=[6C7E3270:01C8E8BA]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1565; t=1216374076; x=1217238076; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=lear@cisco.com; z=From:=20Eliot=20Lear=20<lear@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20Proposed=20Experiment=3A=20More=20Meeti ng=20Time=20on=20Friday=20for=20IETF=2073 |Sender:=20; bh=P4JazGxanrRZlS/48HThZ29g2JBz2+4xwpzoXoGQvuU=; b=eC8cwWFz/xA6SvcMgoKTZc3n1pgh0X8VGU8wkLbhqcH4iX/ZTiGNvwdMny u2TYiWNPGRkK19dQdobKZFusmb+OEyLF75X93gM8GIReMmGr0NCf/QuMNWnt IQYMy0XAeZ;
Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-2; header.From=lear@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/amsdkim2001 verified; );
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, IETF Announcement list <ietf-announce@ietf.org>, iesg@iesg.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
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>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Maybe it's just me, but...

I oppose this experiment.  I already donate to my employer a significant 
amount of travel time on weekends without wanting to add to it.  Flight 
schedules are tightening, thanks to the cost of fuel, which means that 
having sessions on Friday at all poses a problem now, if I want to get 
back by Saturday.  Having afternoon sessions would put a nail in that 
coffin.

I propose two alternative experiments:

1.  Required agendas and Approval

No session can be approved without a posted agenda.  Many agendas are 
late, which makes it difficult for people to know where they have to be 
and when.  This is particularly true of working groups that meet more 
than once.  The dhc chairs in particular have done a really good job of 
providing the working group with an opportunity to comment on the agenda 
prior to upload.  Approval of agenda by either WG or AD (I could make 
arguments for both) would also limit stupid stuff.  Just because I've 
written a draft doesn't make it intersting to anyone else.

2.  More meeting rooms per venue.

While this one adds expense in  one way it can reduce in hotel and food 
costs to counterbalance.  The real downside is that people will have to 
be pickier as to which meetings they attend.

In addition, I'd argue that we need to update our rules to allow for 
less notice so that more use of teleconferencing can take place.  I 
recognize that this solution is not a panacea, especially for the poor 
shmo who has to be up at 4:00am to participate.

Eliot
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf