Re: Agenda experiment for IETF 103 in November in Bangkok

Daniel Harkins <> Tue, 05 June 2018 20:20 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A9B2130DDC for <>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 13:20:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 72ZkmP3Y0B81 for <>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 13:20:00 -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 17D73130DCF for <>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 13:19:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) by (PMDF V6.7-x02 #1001) with ESMTP id <> for; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 15:19:59 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from thinny.local ([]) by (PMDF V6.7-x01 #1001) with ESMTPSA id <> for; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 13:19:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unknown ([] EXTERNAL) (EHLO thinny.local) with TLS/SSL by ([]) (PreciseMail V3.3); Tue, 05 Jun 2018 13:19:32 -0700
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 13:19:56 -0700
From: Daniel Harkins <>
Subject: Re: Agenda experiment for IETF 103 in November in Bangkok
In-reply-to: <10827.1527782174@localhost>
Message-id: <>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-language: en-US
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0
X-PMAS-SPF: SPF check skipped for authenticated session (, send-ip=
X-PMAS-External-Auth: unknown [] (EHLO thinny.local)
References: <> <> <> <> <10827.1527782174@localhost>
X-PMAS-Software: PreciseMail V3.3 [180605a] (
X-PMAS-Allowed: system rule (rule allow header:X-PMAS-External noexists)
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 20:20:03 -0000

On 5/31/18 8:56 AM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> János Farkas <> wrote:
>      > I'm afraid IETF 103 may not be the best IETF meeting to experiment with
>      > ending the IETF meeting on Thursday.
> Interesting.
>      > 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.
> Maybe some of these things could occur on the Friday?


>      > IEEE 802 Plenary meetings start on Monday
>      > (
>      > Increasing the gap between the two meetings may decrease the participation
>      > thus the success of such workshops
> So the gap will grow from two days to three days.

   There are IEEE 802.11 meetings that happen on Sunday and I expect
that other 802 groups may also have leadership/planning meetings on
Sunday. These are at the level of IETF - IEEE 802 Coordination though.
Your average Joe IETFer and Jane IEEEer will not be going to these.

   Increasing the gap from 2 to 3 days does not seem to pose a problem
to people who would be attending these meetings anyway. If you're gonna
stay in Bangkok over the weekend then you're gonna stay in Bangkok over
the weekend.

> I'm not among those who is involved in IEEE802 meetings, but if I were, I
> don't think the change would negatively affect my decision to stay: it's not
> like I get home a day earlier either way.
> (If I were among those who had the time and funding to do both meetings, I
> would find the back to back meetings would be a significant dis-incentive to
> attend both. I don't think it contributes to cross-fertilization, and I think
> that it creates significant family-based barriers to entry)
> Having the three day gap might even make the gap easier to enjoy, if one
> did bring a family with you.
> To me, the only thing that would change this is if we moved the Hackathon to
> the weekend afterwards, such that the gap was entirely filled. That would
> also potentially mix hackathoners with IETF and IEEE people.

   As someone who will probably attend both IETF and IEEE 802 and who is not
in IETF or IEEE 802 leadership, I'd really appreciate a break to get out of
the hotel (and maybe even Bangkok). Yes, the gap would not only make it 
to enjoy but also easier to tolerate.

   I think your idea of the moving the hackathon to the weekend 
afterwards to
be very interesting. If IEEE 802 was able to promote it between now and then
it might result in the cross-pollination you refer to-- more people with a
different perspective. That might actually be a reason to stay in 
Bangkok and
it might increase the number of people who stay during the gap (beyond the
IETF - IEEE 802 leadership).