IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [admin-discuss] Next steps towards a net zero IETF

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Tue, 04 April 2023 06:20 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
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 A6339C151710; Mon, 3 Apr 2023 23:20:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nF2JQVL2WIi4; Mon, 3 Apr 2023 23:20:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [91.190.195.94]) (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 4CDADC14CF1D; Mon, 3 Apr 2023 23:20:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:1467:f88d:db7e:606e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AE7C82078A; Tue, 4 Apr 2023 09:20:03 +0300 (EEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: [admin-discuss] Next steps towards a net zero IETF
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2023 09:20:01 +0300
Message-Id: <2658CD52-2D36-43E5-973B-39EB713E6A27@eggert.org>
References: <13153.1680560012@localhost>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, admin-discuss@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <13153.1680560012@localhost>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-MailScanner-ID: AE7C82078A.A61BD
X-MailScanner: Not scanned: please contact your Internet E-Mail Service Provider for details
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/ZIrUaryviAWIo1CilpKo_VU_HaY>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IETF-Discussion. This is the most general IETF mailing list, intended for discussion of technical, procedural, operational, and other topics for which no dedicated mailing lists exist." <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, 04 Apr 2023 06:20:12 -0000

Hi,

On 4. Apr 2023, at 01:14, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
> Or we could just start with having three f2f meetings per year, with more
> slots for informal meetings...

I just wanted to point out that we're seeing a different push in the IESG from WG chairs, many of which want more WG session time during IETF meetings. That isn't to say that they wouldn't also want more informal time, but there is a tussle here. 

Additional tracks and/or longer days and/or full-length Fridays will likely be needed and the community should weigh those against their downsides for in-person and remote attendees.

Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email