Re: Saturday as start day
Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org> Wed, 21 June 2017 17:18 UTC
Return-Path: <lee@asgard.org>
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 F2D481201FA for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jun 2017 10:18:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 UX_BXkGU6W-9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jun 2017 10:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from atl4mhob11.registeredsite.com (atl4mhob11.registeredsite.com [209.17.115.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F004128BBB for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jun 2017 10:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailpod.hostingplatform.com ([10.30.71.204]) by atl4mhob11.registeredsite.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v5LHHpn0009315 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jun 2017 13:17:51 -0400
Received: (qmail 6454 invoked by uid 0); 21 Jun 2017 17:17:51 -0000
X-TCPREMOTEIP: 68.100.68.25
X-Authenticated-UID: lee@asgard.org
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.160?) (lee@asgard.org@68.100.68.25) by 0 with ESMTPA; 21 Jun 2017 17:17:50 -0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.7.2.170228
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 13:17:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Saturday as start day
From: Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org>
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>, ietf@ietf.org
Message-ID: <D57020DB.7D730%lee@asgard.org>
Thread-Topic: Saturday as start day
References: <63406DFB-217A-4306-B717-E86D97BA2AA9@cooperw.in> <709494B2-53ED-4483-9B1C-3855D81CD120@gmail.com> <a6ceaa2d-16fa-6145-bd2d-811dba6027ea@huitema.net>
In-Reply-To: <a6ceaa2d-16fa-6145-bd2d-811dba6027ea@huitema.net>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/qPEuM-4bOM0jy89zhT8NRDeSvrs>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 21 Jun 2017 17:18:01 -0000
On 6/21/17, 9:53 AM, "ietf on behalf of Christian Huitema" <ietf-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of huitema@huitema.net> wrote: >On 6/21/2017 5:46 AM, Bob Hinden wrote: > >> Alissa, >> >>> On Jun 21, 2017, at 3:34 PM, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Based on a suggestion from Paul Hoffman, the IESG believes it would be >>>beneficial to denote the official start of IETF meetings to be on >>>Saturday rather than Sunday, starting with IETF 100. We believe this >>>would be sensible given that events such as the hackathon and code >>>sprint start on Saturday, and may make it easier for some participants >>>to get travel approval to attend those events. This change would be >>>reflected in the dates posted on the IETF web site and sent out in >>>email announcements. We are not proposing any changes in terms of the >>>scheduling of any meeting-related events, the full availability of the >>>meeting network starting on Sunday, the opening of on-site >>>registration, or the meeting fee. >>> >The problem is that we now are expected to have work going non stop from >Saturday to Friday. 7 full days. Maybe I am just old, but that does not >look healthy. > >-- Christian Huitema That’s already what many of us do, with 12-16 hour days, following our regular work week the previous week, and slipping actual travel time in between other work. It’s not that anybody expects me to work that amount of time, it’s just that that’s the amount of work I need to get done during IETF weeks. Many times I’ve had people want to schedule hours-long meetings on Sunday “before” IETF, but I have IETF commitments that day. So this updating the description to match reality. Having said that, I’ll argue my own point: are the Saturday-Sunday events actually IETF activities? If “the work of the IETF” is just the set of stuff contained in WGs and maybe BoFs, then the meeting is Monday-Friday. If the Hackathon, Code Sprint, Tutorials, IEPG, and receptions are IETF activities, then the meeting is Saturday-Friday, though many people may elect not to arrive until later. Lee
- Saturday as start day Alissa Cooper
- Re: Saturday as start day Bob Hinden
- Re: Saturday as start day Andrew G. Malis
- Re: Saturday as start day Christian Huitema
- Re: Saturday as start day Thomas Nadeau
- Re: Saturday as start day Tim Chown
- Re: Saturday as start day Livingood, Jason
- Re: Saturday as start day Andrew G. Malis
- Re: Saturday as start day John Levine
- Re: Saturday as start day Lee Howard
- Re: Saturday as start day Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: Saturday as start day Jeff Tantsura
- Re: Saturday as start day Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
- Re: Saturday as start day Randy Bush
- Re: Saturday as start day George Michaelson
- Re: Saturday as start day Jari Arkko
- Re: Saturday as start day Tobias Gondrom
- Re: Saturday as start day Eric Burger
- Re: Saturday as start day tom p.
- Re: Saturday as start day Alissa Cooper