Re: Simplifying our processes: Conference Calls

Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca> Wed, 05 December 2012 16:09 UTC

Return-Path: <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
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 32E3521F8CDB for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 08:09:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hSB+VTRCRO+l for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 08:09:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 587B721F8CD8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 08:09:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mb.lan (modemcable180.211-203-24.mc.videotron.ca [24.203.211.180]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B22D5412C7; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 11:09:49 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Simplifying our processes: Conference Calls
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
From: Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
In-Reply-To: <999913AB42CC9341B05A99BBF358718D022E0BE8@FIESEXC035.nsn-intra.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 11:09:48 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5E4964F3-6E62-4AE0-AC1E-B2E5EAB1FAB3@viagenie.ca>
References: <50BE3721.90004@dcrocker.net> <CCE40691.1531%Hannes.Tschofenig@nsn.com> <CAF4+nEGATcHjM0360Vun1KdxsHabxuSyVRPzsFqo-Ex5eqvJ4w@mail.gmail.com> <999913AB42CC9341B05A99BBF358718D022E0BE8@FIESEXC035.nsn-intra.net>
To: "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 16:09:51 -0000

Le 2012-12-05 à 04:25, Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) a écrit :

> Hi Donald, 
> 
>> It's a question of costs and benefits. The cost of the IETF Announce
>> posting is small. There are not that many of them and I don't find
>> them to be a burden.
> 
> How many conference calls as part of working group activities did you
> organize in the last two years?

I did some.

> 
> Maybe there are not that many because the overhead is too high to
> organize them. 

don't agree. Matter of minutes.

> 
>> The benefit in openness and transparency is
>> large.

I agree with Donald.

Marc.

> 
> Are working group activities not open and transparent in your view?
> 
>> Thus the answer is simple and the policy should remain as it is
>> for now. If conditions change, it can certainly be revisited.
> How many conference calls of working groups you are not subscribed to
> did you attend? 
> 
> Ciao
> Hannes
> 
> 
>> Thanks,
>> Donald
>> =============================
>> Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>> 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
>> d3e3e3@gmail.com
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Hannes Tschofenig
>> <Hannes.Tschofenig@nsn.com> wrote:
>>>> The concept is simple:  a time-specific gather is a meeting.
>> Meetings
>>>> require prior announcement beyond the working group.
>>> 
>>> I am not against a meeting announcement. I am suggesting to announce
>> the
>>> meeting where the audience is -- in the working group.
>>>