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