Re: On diversity in the NomCom

Victor Kuarsingh <victor@jvknet.com> Wed, 15 July 2020 16:43 UTC

Return-Path: <victor@jvknet.com>
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 51BF33A00C9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 09:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=jvknet-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 YLpffn-rFiqd for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 09:43:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x332.google.com (mail-wm1-x332.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::332]) (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 0930D3A0303 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 09:43:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x332.google.com with SMTP id f139so6449432wmf.5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 09:43:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jvknet-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1YiF23tUQ6BBe1tFK+R3S/WwuQFDvTTrjScHO5GNwuU=; b=MVZARC0X14NJQM5eXv3ev55hbmjsnomQolcZaoWpN9TASsTHBsCEz4H7VBXdouVYHB RocfWtWv/N/4kAAyr2oGad0MkQcTwMazYZCVaY/iJ4otIKR/6+hXWkYj0s3xZw3RgGn2 ykTBlyvYs+rAbvORx4VhHhxRHX0NRKlAbq99hjRIChL/eIm5pOKQ0r0JQTAppDbMepaD 0qh28jxP0DwvdQ0ILhxBVaBpPtFPb039BPnLkRCQ+tKG/f5l1nD/xn5iuWJ9XOiCXFQR pFE4I1ffgAB4OeQxjFkhElm5VQjcYLRMnwdHDSg0fkWKozdxEsBi4ID00/37j9vK6nt/ SM1g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1YiF23tUQ6BBe1tFK+R3S/WwuQFDvTTrjScHO5GNwuU=; b=ExfQfKyKpLThcZ/5loZDupo8M0D+eYKSqGoU3OYsWgu/AwxrP6IpfCroEO6qaKEEIE jQNPwBvQkm5RUmSgdS9fZQhP2gK+fxolW/iGeyGmR9bOmYely2ZwB7v19m8QNKu9nZ73 VPXER3RX9lzGOGDEpd15ttv5aBnD9U+0hGujTv6SYMFtJd56ATykoZae2ULHqD69fnkn 2kcao2sP0A0zxmThA7JhOZpu7GBTkAvIt8cm3v91oJRLHIXf2/IBUPsCsDm6RoFq1bfY bMK85G/vWJmXXZmCC1Tc/mnRnnxsxz+kg/PBhuz9HpFuCoLPqcs/4oQM8eX/7LcxHV+h Pwug==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532wIRoxLPelkdgAcw1UhfAJEW4vY2r1SOSRIcgIRQDFVyToSy5M pcCX2NtjuHcB/JxXhi5k9KVXlxWmWGBBba/sRNSEOw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw2KzL5xvpxgza7Vi2OZanwVSPHdkHMtm6cvcaAX5GRR5bUewBE41xNl/+tHyUhjPsN4ugHxYKF5fxta7k3NVw=
X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c099:: with SMTP id r25mr302377wmh.159.1594831435186; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 09:43:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <7429392e-a411-4c40-8fa9-f03de558b7ca@dogfood.fastmail.com> <CAChr6Sweag6G2sfdOrpGUZnPybK4eqn-EHFVHMgSv5V+MtHcow@mail.gmail.com> <d3187a20-76a8-0ef9-d32f-6b8e400a0d30@gmail.com> <ee517835-1ad4-e2c0-a33b-e194f7c37f95@gmail.com> <CAChr6SxXwKwwtXxL+9f2Zz8kufpnOLmHHkK-dY6PC+k9mNE4+w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAChr6SxXwKwwtXxL+9f2Zz8kufpnOLmHHkK-dY6PC+k9mNE4+w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Victor Kuarsingh <victor@jvknet.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 12:43:44 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJc3aaPis6uo8Q4ceQN=q9VGVb9v8XvZS4nw3zk=pHpdvpp-LA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: On diversity in the NomCom
To: Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002bd7d305aa7da152"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/hYuXGFZOXgDxfdZ0GWvvmIzOMLo>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <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: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 16:43:58 -0000

On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 4:51 AM Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 1:57 PM Brian E Carpenter <
> brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Nevertheless, the fact is that big
>> companies can (and do) send more people, and provide more sponsorship
>> (such as hosting meetings, and funding Area Directors), than small
>> companies. If they didn't get something back for that, they would
>> complain, or simply withdraw their resources.
>>
>
> This seems like one of those things that might not "return to normal".
>
> IETF work seems to be proceeding fine without people flying long distances
> to sit in a hotel conference room and look at their laptops.
>

Its quite possible this may wind up being true.  That said, at least for
me, we are also likely operating on momentum that has been built up over a
number of months / years.   Understanding what work look like, and what
changes we may need to expect, may not be manifest for some time.

Not to overly correlate this to "day-job", but I can certainly say there
are differences in a full remote model vs. hybrid model.  What we can get
done, and how work gets done is not the same IMO.   I am not suggesting we
can't operate fully remote, I am just unsure on what that means.

Where as many do "look at their laptops", there is considerable social
interaction which is not immaterial to how we work (after all, we are all
still human - for now).

regards,

Victor K




>
> thanks,
> Rob
>
>
>