Re: Remote participation fees [Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY]

[Dave Cridland <[e-mail]>]

On 14 February 2015 at 21:20, Ted Lemon <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Feb 14, 2015, at 4:16 PM, John C Klensin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > Of course,
> > that also has disadvantages in terms of competent cross-area
> > review.  Not simple.
>
> I question whether there is a real opportunity for cross-area review at
> F2F meetings.   The schedules are jam-packed.   As an AD, there was never
> an opportunity to see what other areas were doing, and as an individual
> participant it's hard to know where to go, and there are often conflicts.
>
>
Well, you could always scrap the WG meetings at the IETF weeks and make it
all broad topic meetings, or make the WG meetings actually aimed at
presenting the work to outsiders (ie, deliberately court the people who
don't read the drafts that we normally moan about).

I am, you'll appreciate, thinking aloud here, but if the real value in
face-to-face meetings is in personal contact (agreed) and cross-area review
(wishful thinking), then why not optimize for those cases and use online,
remote, technology for the stuff where it works well?

Dave.