Re: [Recentattendees] Remote Participation for IETF 95: Meetecho Details

John C Klensin <> Thu, 31 March 2016 18:39 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD8C612D6AD; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 11:39:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0vsH5zsUSZyD; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 11:39:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 86E5112D5AB; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 11:39:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( by with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <>) id 1alhVW-0004cp-6l; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 14:39:50 -0400
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 14:39:45 -0400
From: John C Klensin <>
To:, IETF Secretariat <>
Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] Remote Participation for IETF 95: Meetecho Details
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on; SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 18:39:53 -0000

--On Thursday, March 31, 2016 11:23 -0700 Dave Crocker
<> wrote:

> On 3/31/2016 11:15 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
>> I notice that the placeholder for IETF 95 "Remote
>> Participation" at  still is not
>> associated with a link.  On the meeting page
>> (,
> ...
> Yes, there are some hiccups in some of the pages.
> However I latched onto the directive that remote participants
> need to register and, after searching and finding the problems
> you cited, decided to try to register.  There I found that I
> could choose 'remote participation' as a class of registration
> and everything else was normal, except that it didn't charge
> me.

Yes, I found that too (and mentioned it in my note).   My
concern (independent of concerns about how the decisions were
made) is that you and I are about as experienced IETF old hands
(complete with appropriately-colored beards) as members of any
group of people around here.   A newcomer who can be easily
discouraged (rather than one who is exceptionally persistent and
determined) might well just give up instead.   I presume (and
hope) that is not the behavior we want to encourage.  

It really wouldn't take much effort to put a few sentences on
the meeting page (and either on the IETF home page or at the top
of the registration one) to say something like 'The IETF is now
requiring that remote participants register for the meeting
using the normal registration process but checking the new
"Remote Participant" category.  Doing so will give such
participants access to various capabilities including the
Meetecho remote conferencing system.'.   I'm just having trouble
understanding why it apparently didn't occur to anyone to do
that whether you and I can figure out how to navigate the system
or not.