Re: Agenda experiment for IETF 103 in November in Bangkok

János Farkas <> Thu, 31 May 2018 14:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0957812E04A for <>; Thu, 31 May 2018 07:59:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.309
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.309 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nxGu750c96ku for <>; Thu, 31 May 2018 07:59:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0EEA124BE8 for <>; Thu, 31 May 2018 07:59:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256;; s=mailgw201801; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt;; t=1527778764; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:CC:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=JmujKGzeFeZUhw2UT6WMoR6VTdS0GG7ikmhKWhz0CMU=; b=gvW/1g/A9pKByD94ruBSki8yAGLSDpKhqWZgjcpY/Xv1G5WYMvJoQzc8tLJXVq3T gDY1pOjQtWI5HJR4zK+Ag/+W1dksXUCh9mrcN3mfEeI2GkVkbwSF45QJP3YGl6ew LQQ7GGgCXX/ehGSB4JFA+sHW9b2iq7qXtCFDQpqJNkA=;
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-703639c000003465-f0-5b100dccebe9
Received: from (Unknown_Domain []) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id CC.D6.13413.CCD001B5; Thu, 31 May 2018 16:59:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [] ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.382.0; Thu, 31 May 2018 16:59:09 +0200
Subject: Re: Agenda experiment for IETF 103 in November in Bangkok
References: <> <> <>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?J=c3=a1nos_Farkas?= <>
CC: <>
To: <>, <>, <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 16:59:09 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------CC871F62468286471184A57A"
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrPLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM2K7hO4ZXoFog6mfRC3OLp7DZnFpzT8m ixl/JjJbPNs4n8WBxWPJkp9MAYxRXDYpqTmZZalF+nYJXBk7TixnLFgQUvH7X3ED4xq7LkYO DgkBE4l5K5m6GLk4hASOMEr8vrWBsYuRE8hZyyjR08gOYgsLOEksOHOXDaLoGKPEvGXbWUES bAL2EncvbWAGsZkF5CR+tXWBxUUEzCQ2vH3MBmLzAtV0XDkAFmcRUJWYu+oGI8hiUYEYifV9 CRAlghInZz5hAbE5BTwlZq09yQgxMkxix7z37BD3qEl8evuQfQIj/ywkLbOQlEHYFhIz559n hLDlJZq3zmaGsDUkWufMZUcWX8DItopRtDi1OCk33chYL7UoM7m4OD9PLy+1ZBMjMJgPbvmt uoPx8hvHQ4wCHIxKPLwt3ALRQqyJZcWVuYcYJTiYlUR4p5TxRwvxpiRWVqUW5ccXleakFh9i lOZgURLnfWi+OUpIID2xJDU7NbUgtQgmy8TBKdXAaGp9ueJ7wNKyXQs5dtZJFxvplAYGRr55 vL/eI89nautFD74upYm6h5rWqfObs9WdY73W+L7rbrHoqhORT/40bnBfc3dK5QNHZ/HfU8pm Ln+7QORqdR/f8VT/8opPh17LBT35bvQxsOC9m5GQtv7qlOJTk11qIrdmrZ2txp2n/IQ3dWqZ fUSUEktxRqKhFnNRcSIAgML3smICAAA=
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:59:29 -0000


I'm afraid IETF 103 may not be the best IETF meeting to experiment with 
ending the IETF meeting on Thursday.

November 2018 is one of the very rare occasions when the IETF and the 
IEEE 802 Plenary meetings are back-to-back in the same hotel. The 
previous occasion was March 2013, the one before was before 2007 afak. 
The two meetings are typically in the same month but often on different 

Given the unique opportunity of this November, we have started to 
investigate the possibility of joint workshops of different groups of 
the two organizations. I'm aware of two: IETF - IEEE 802 Coordination 
workshop and DetNet - TSN/IEC workshop, but there may be more.

IEEE 802 Plenary meetings start on Monday 

Increasing the gap between the two meetings may decrease the 
participation thus the success of such workshops

Best regards,

> *From:*ietf [] *On Behalf Of *IETF Chair
> *Sent:* Friday, May 11, 2018 8:08 AM
> *To:* ietf <>
> *Subject:* Agenda experiment for IETF 103 in November in Bangkok
> The IESG will experiment with a new agenda structure at IETF 103. We 
> will be running working group meetings Monday to Thursday, November 
> 5-8, only. There will be no working group meetings on Friday, November 
> 9. A variety of facilities will be available for ad hoc meetings on 
> Friday, including some breakout rooms available until 13:30 and the 
> Code Lounge until 15:00. Participants will be able to sign up to use 
> ad hoc meeting space on Friday starting when we open up WG scheduling 
> for IETF 103.
> The motivations for this experiment are twofold. First, with the 
> growth of the IETF Hackathon, the IETF meeting week is getting very 
> long for a larger number of people. This is affecting even people who 
> do not attend the Hackathon, because other pre-meeting events are now 
> being scheduled prior to the Hackathon. Second, we would like to 
> provide more unstructured time for IETF participants. Given that 
> 20-25% of working groups typically request not to be scheduled on 
> Friday already, we will be experimenting with more unstructured time 
> on Friday.
> While running this experiment we will still be able to accommodate our 
> usual number of working group scheduling requests, in part by offering 
> a larger number of shorter slots. There will be no 2.5-hour slots in 
> the meeting session request tool; 2 hours will be the longest slot 
> available for sign-up. WG chairs who want a slot that is longer than 2 
> hours will be encouraged to check the ‘Other’ box in the list of slot 
> lengths in the meeting request tool and explain in the text box that 
> they would like a longer slot. We will be able to combine slots on 
> some days and in some meeting rooms to provide longer slots for WGs 
> that need them. (This is basically just a reversal of the current 
> default, where WG chairs already can indicate that they are willing to 
> split their slot with another WG).
> We will be collecting feedback about this experiment via the meeting 
> survey. You will also be welcome to send feedback directly to 
> <> or by speaking with IESG members 
> at the meeting.
> Alissa Cooper
> on behalf of the IESG