Re: Update on IETF 108 Planning

Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com> Tue, 07 April 2020 10:24 UTC

Return-Path: <ximaera@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01A0D3A1A9A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 03:24:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 uiNqMzP6ADyx for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 03:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb2e.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D4563A1A99 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 03:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb2e.google.com with SMTP id h205so1539452ybg.6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 07 Apr 2020 03:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ez/60Vw3A/XWkltbHpQTePEEDgLl6xzyfFeXLEwoaOU=; b=jC4yiTG69UmSyagcAXFNCa+JeyXLMLQqcBPs25YQ/nj3C02iIv+6i5KIMJZT+l7+u5 +qnbRnag+gpolUH7xcVMOmfkVfFaHMZ9DCy/SOEjYIwTc1TC6VQi3tGowxTpCgbEYgiH v99izhHw94wiMagzfuoQYT2o/QO9DrBFZw8XxZF4Qx7vIs2ea5LIpaJUihxidXYVUMC+ l/9SBStT7Nj/cxRVx3VOd2EstNoNEGA5X4iNnL1+b/XYaWdwfk1ZuhE4pfzdVAwGRp3z Q7aB9my4lBSTG4/Ha0LiUKY21bIDjzezbFp11aSiLZwOKDp2+Fw1F3OuP7PG80YJXKl9 FQiQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ez/60Vw3A/XWkltbHpQTePEEDgLl6xzyfFeXLEwoaOU=; b=DfONtQtxx0FRWtPg74Q+qay1ffQxqkAC1E3oDVDwwhgvPwLMaP0WGrdwUSLkvd9yax Yia9Smad9QJIubnVK3Pvbaa8zh+hIC7Tf6DsRKQPlqn3BHQj8cZk56qOutWqbU2cVaTL 4WTRQ4d2dGiY1iJyMkQ3/jnhb4eTlh5ZLjXOHq8HvbKW+EkJzX3Oy4HqcvhP/XJn3Nau kOW5FvfYlm9QvrkXzbviGnUh/N0lOIK5QA2NtxRM8tQVsNjkK9BmEPiG8lL2ot3+oBPw ROgepZTeuybdbRlxaN8CUHzCal9J3jFqB4QwEVFAAlZmzdpiITyjGykKIl49UdS8oyvx rfLA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0Pubz4ZQOOVyL6nbDBvuiUjkUV/pSosSQVf97dkNfry2CqFi4yRfz f4GY4eETDfOKt+5iwO9TintdsiGnihH5ZA+a7f6Bip3soLSP0A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJMeiKRJ8a60JAiiKZoX6dPeB/PgGdMrdNEOAciGOIziP+4m+OZAcevN7tl9hdI6Y1MAjTLJCi+9UxEMQxwYCw=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:b8c5:: with SMTP id g5mr2572871ybm.64.1586255083274; Tue, 07 Apr 2020 03:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2020 13:24:30 +0300
Message-ID: <CALZ3u+a9SEt=YT9=1iPhrUOSmuzUY_nNuSD_dDXSPGNFLUaqCA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Update on IETF 108 Planning
To: ietf@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/SSK_STCxzGIA3uye3jy1etD7UQc>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 07 Apr 2020 10:24:46 -0000

Peace,

> IETF 108 is scheduled to be held 25-31 July 2020
> in Madrid, Spain. However, based on current
> conditions in Spain and around the world, we are
> actively planning for a virtual version of the IETF
> 108 meeting.
>
> We expect to start a survey soon that will help us
> understand the community’s preferences about
> many aspects of future virtual IETF meetings.

I suggest asking whether we need a "meeting" at all if everyone is on remote.

IETF meetings were a nice way to cut some travel expenses (by having
everyone you need in the same room for 7 days) and to get in touch
with people during cool social events.  There are no more parties, and
there's no more travel.

Otherwise, nearly every active WG is holding their own interim calls
already, and it's quite convenient when those are not densely packed
into a week (creating scheduling conflicts and overlaps) and are not
required to be bound to an early morning in a specific timezone
(though Madrid's got CEST which personally fits me well).

--
Töma