IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: For Review: IESG Statement on Guidance on Face-to-Face and Virtual Interim Meetings

"Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> Thu, 10 December 2015 19:06 UTC

Return-Path: <fred@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68EAA1A1B95; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 11:06:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -114.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-114.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 aIMrPA6GOJ18; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 11:06:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75DE81ACD84; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 11:05:45 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1020; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1449774345; x=1450983945; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=HOpQGEO0UP5hTOjSVfXbuVtNAyohL1RqF7huHVq9Nhc=; b=WzmiGFQRALqibWPKwG/e8pARknsRkbBvoP/DTE6lIDTeXqaSozpWPHGT PU4lVeMt/VTiOH6p3hjk8t5ARutBAHRlFV4vqlyxd94MrEzYuFmAtKhWe DlSK3qIJNQwBmxUzspXS7iWlAWWSPxEZz5g2pfm2QXJ6yMPVboui1KdJ0 0=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0D7AQByzGlW/4QNJK1egzpTdLscghkBDYFiIYVuAhyBHjgUAQEBAQEBAX8LhDUBAQQjEUUQAgEIGgImAgICMBUQAgQOiDQNrXiSCAEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARQEgQGHZIJuhFmDHi+BGgWWbwGFM4gPgVuERIc9jywBHwEBQoJEgUCFRYEHAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,409,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="217035697"
Received: from alln-core-10.cisco.com ([173.36.13.132]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 10 Dec 2015 19:05:44 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-012.cisco.com (xch-aln-012.cisco.com [173.36.7.22]) by alln-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id tBAJ5ixe012092 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 10 Dec 2015 19:05:44 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-013.cisco.com (173.37.102.23) by XCH-ALN-012.cisco.com (173.36.7.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 13:05:43 -0600
Received: from xch-rcd-013.cisco.com ([173.37.102.23]) by XCH-RCD-013.cisco.com ([173.37.102.23]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 13:05:44 -0600
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
To: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: For Review: IESG Statement on Guidance on Face-to-Face and Virtual Interim Meetings
Thread-Topic: For Review: IESG Statement on Guidance on Face-to-Face and Virtual Interim Meetings
Thread-Index: AQHRM2mMfJpt9GwtckyIA7GoQVwBm57Ecy0A
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 19:05:43 +0000
Message-ID: <4DD3E1F4-C057-4164-A8B0-445DB66D5F14@cisco.com>
References: <20151210164031.22024.98672.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20151210164031.22024.98672.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.151105
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.19.64.120]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <92FB2464643FD544BC29A87C8ADCBCB7@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/RvabZLQQ7JCUD7ENCpyLhuEvZLU>
Cc: WGChairs <wgchairs-bounces@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 19:06:15 -0000

>The IESG is considering publication of the IESG Statement on Guidance on 
>Face-to-Face and Virtual Interim Meetings. Please review and comment.

For the most part, I would describe this as "non-controversial".

One statement made in the note is "Also, we have seen significant benefits when two or more working groups meet together." To my knowledge, this has happened only once, in the context of a RIPE meeting, and for my working group it was pretty much a bust. Joel recorded our observations in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jaeggli-interim-observations.

Am I missing something? What "significant benefits" have been observed by correlating interim meetings of working groups that would not be having a combined meeting?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email