Re: 10 a.m.

[Ted Lemon <[e-mail]>]

Yes, but that would require a serious rethink about how we run meetings,
and suggestions to that effect have not gone far.   I think we need to add
a new working group to discuss it in more depth and bring it to
consensus....

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 9:12 AM, John C Klensin <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> --On Monday, July 11, 2016 16:38 +0100 Stewart Bryant
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > I am more concerned that we have wasted five hours of meeting
> > time that could have been used to reduce meeting conflicts,
> > and thus enable better cross area review.
>
> FWIW, the justification for a half-day Friday session was that
> it was necessary to schedule so much work that there was simply
> no way to do it in four days.  There have been comments in this
> thread (and the many prior versions of it) about the
> desirability of getting home in Friday (which, in turn, may
> interact with decisions about bringing families to meetings as
> well as with both participant and IETF costs).   If we really
> have potential surplus meeting hours, is it time to reconsider
> the Friday decision, trying to use possible meeting slots
> (including time recovered by reducing the number of plenaries)
> efficiently enough to return to a four-day schedule?
>
>    john
>
>
>