Re: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance by continent
Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net> Fri, 10 September 2010 17:01 UTC
Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EC2E3A6843 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:01:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5xMKqDGDBRRj for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:01:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7476C3A6809 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:01:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.4] (ppp-68-120-198-81.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [68.120.198.81]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8AH21t8026851 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:02:06 -0700
Message-ID: <4C8A6485.8080508@dcrocker.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:01:57 -0700
From: Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100825 Thunderbird/3.1.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net>
Subject: Re: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance by continent
References: <83Ueo.11431665$AQ7.5968679@sj-news-1.cisco.com> <4C817A94.5010104@cisco.com> <4C86A3A0.30306@bogus.com> <0A6EECA4-ECE9-4B73-BF59-E6990AE07BB3@arsc.edu> <DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB177049A988EA60C@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
In-Reply-To: <DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB177049A988EA60C@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:02:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 11:42:13 -0700
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 17:01:40 -0000
On 9/7/2010 5:41 PM, Ross Callon wrote: >> It's my sense that it's increasingly difficult to do work in the IETF >> without being physically present at meetings, as well... > > I think that this has been true since the first IETF (at least if you > replace the word "increasingly" with the word "very"). Face-to-face is quite helpful for forming an effort, since it creates a connection among the group, and it is quite helpful for resolving specific problems. That is, it is good for personal connection and rapid interaction. For a group with real focus and a strong sense of purpose, face to face is /not/ all that important for general document development and revision, absent particular points of impasse. So the 'very' Ross cites has always been true, but in constrained ways. Useful documents can be developed with /no/ face-to-face interactions. Useless documents are often developed with /primarily/ face-to-face interactions. Neither mode has a guaranteed outcome. IMO, the tendency to move more towards doing work in f2f meetings seems primarily to indicate a lack of urgency, process management and/or technical focus, rather than on an actual need. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net
- Re: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance … Hascall Sharp
- Re: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance … Joel Jaeggli
- Re: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance … James M. Polk
- Re: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance … Melinda Shore
- Re: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance … Janet P Gunn
- Re: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance … Marshall Eubanks
- RE: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance … Ross Callon
- Re: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance … Keith Moore
- Re: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance … Joel Jaeggli
- Re: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance … Dave CROCKER
- Re: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance … ned+ietf
- Re: Optimizing for what? Was Re: IETF Attendance … Martin Rex