Re: Interim meetings - changing the way we work

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Thu, 26 February 2015 13:08 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@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 495351A8860 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 05:08:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 TV96N0oV-jWn for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 05:08:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-2.cisco.com (aer-iport-2.cisco.com [173.38.203.52]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D07F1A9077 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 05:08:06 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1638; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1424956086; x=1426165686; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ujS08q+O5InsOqtQl0WhFCaphczkCZYWE45nvB7qZEI=; b=Nl0zgyUsMEKFBcqtiFOgkZq41DCgHHikdFBqZQuwPLKstP0SEY2uOqL+ I7AMs7XYWrhwMbe4neA46D8ID2dQ10MJQuDnBJCJ/iXm0uwcNE3p2OUvB lwhcO7d/uKyZi6Xj7DZsDXys2M3fWmnb/WpjrGgh7sFMqTU7mGnK0xOdX Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AbBQDcGe9U/xbLJq1bg1RawgWFcAKBbgEBAQEBAXyEDwEBAQMBMgEFQAEFCwsYCRYPCQMCAQIBRQYNAQUCAQGIIwgN1jcBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQETBIsTgjKCPAeEKwEEk0+FZYZpjGAjggIcgVE9MQEBAYJAAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.09,652,1418083200"; d="scan'208";a="361287080"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 26 Feb 2015 13:08:04 +0000
Received: from [10.60.67.91] (ams-bclaise-89110.cisco.com [10.60.67.91]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t1QD83pb025172; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 13:08:04 GMT
Message-ID: <54EF1AB3.6070501@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 14:08:03 +0100
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
Subject: Re: Interim meetings - changing the way we work
References: <CAL0qLwZk=k-CWLte_ChK9f1kzLwMOTRyi7AwFa8fLjBsextBcA@mail.gmail.com> <9772.1420830216@sandelman.ca> <CAL0qLwZatYW2e4Wk6GXB2U26fsCn8BV2qt-07kHBugiq34zrcQ@mail.gmail.com> <6025.1423672358@sandelman.ca> <CAL0qLwYtE618sA99hgXP-5wk+BYdcXLbiZqd_36OreYQ1LB7hQ@mail.gmail.com> <732CCD31-0F13-472F-9825-C5F5D650C41B@vigilsec.com> <2457EE06-4960-40B5-AF10-2EDFBF18B2B6@nominum.com> <7C601AA4-55C4-43FE-B2FE-1D22BD73F166@vigilsec.com> <CAKHUCzyJ62hVyJVVLuL5-nXx_i5VO2cW3LA6R1sdZbDHxoY_Tw@mail.gmail.com> <43ADF7ED-6A42-4097-8FFA-5DA0FC21D07A@vigilsec.com> <CAKHUCzyfB+GhNqmDhrzki4tVn0faMLyt_cqgeHFcQL2b5pkkAQ@mail.gmail.com> <54DE3E1C.6060105@gmail.com> <007301d04927$64890d40$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <54EDA697.5070107@cisco.com> <01c701d050f6$c80fcd00$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <CAMm+LwgzXg+QM29ygS0Bv+HOo2Gd-hPByXYz2aVu-V4b=Jak+Q@mail.gmail.com> <54EEFCFB.7080107@cisco.com> <047F946E-3041-4510-8F78-D8D743C4FEED@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <047F946E-3041-4510-8F78-D8D743C4FEED@nominum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/T9NAOY9MwI4iWmiINJ2Y0PUs53U>
Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>, netmod-chairs@tools.ietf.org, ietf <ietf@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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 26 Feb 2015 13:08:08 -0000

On 26/02/2015 13:09, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Feb 26, 2015, at 6:01 AM, Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> wrote:
>>> People are having interim meetings because a one or two day meeting on one topic is a lot more productive than an IETF WG session.
>> Or because weekly meetings are more efficient.
> Well, they certainly get more done.   I think 6tisch does bi-weekly meetings because it allows them to keep momentum and make continuous forward progress between IETFs.   I think this is a really good thing, although I agree with the observation that such meetings make things harder for people who are not able to be full-time contributors.
>
> I think there is a real tension between a high clock rate enabling a good rate of progress and a too-high clock rate excluding participants.
I think it depends on well the status is documented (to come back to 
Tom's initial point).
For NETMOD, https://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/netmod/yang-1.1/, see in 
particular the latest status on all open points: 
https://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/netmod/yang-1.1/issues.html. Kudos to 
Jürgen Schönwälder for maintaining this.
That being said, (bi-)weekly meetings are more suitable with a well 
documented issue list.

Regards, Benoit

>    I don't think there's an easy answer to this: I think that participants who are less able to attend than they would like need to have conversations with their working group chairs and/or ADs to see if the clock rate can be slowed somewhat without damaging the effectiveness of the working group.   I don't think there will ever be one answer to this that applies to all working groups.
>
>