IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Thinking laterally

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Fri, 27 February 2015 17:09 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E321ACE6C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:09:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.044
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.044 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=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 B4iDUAaIXKWr for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:09:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a102.g.dreamhost.com (sub4.mail.dreamhost.com [69.163.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C86C1ACE99 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:09:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a102.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a102.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65AF520115D54 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:09:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=/K7wsTDGHqzhrLwEDmvKKwrnB3k=; b=fqwDb0EWxui nf1HfC9dGO4UZR6FVHWg35hUHJhzhIlA4a64idfdUL+jzzdAvIQzPtyfZkyF2YP+ jTaT30XLPn9s6SFnrznuio7nhHfpPTjxHoqj0JbpZhrkyaF81knCmqpSXOU8JpZO 0fk6IhQEaXRMb7TT9lBk8J4x05PK3pQo=
Received: from mail-ig0-f181.google.com (mail-ig0-f181.google.com [209.85.213.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a102.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3D9712005D101 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:09:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: by igbhl2 with SMTP id hl2so1985881igb.3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:09:07 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.35.140 with SMTP id j134mr8595334ioj.11.1425056947437; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:09:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.64.130.66 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:09:07 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <2010B1D6-62B6-43E6-97CB-85BC51BBF1AE@nominum.com>
References: <CAMm+LwiLLG8B9vni8moVW3-zufiZdBsPym3vOHDnZ3msGwWyYQ@mail.gmail.com> <7A2564FD-43D1-4CAD-AAAC-C5312B3C066D@nominum.com> <85DB1605D31E310D155BE6F0@caldav.corp.apple.com> <1B0138B5-6FAA-436C-B061-34944460D5A9@nominum.com> <CAK3OfOgdA1EZwgZ_O3T+_GAgMqsO9Kp7O92LeST3HdikBmOiag@mail.gmail.com> <2010B1D6-62B6-43E6-97CB-85BC51BBF1AE@nominum.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 11:09:07 -0600
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOg+P15VawfLHk=jZJhE=swQKXsD8iu_Q6A6v9WKh=jW2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Thinking laterally
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/qfvEx5sWHPR0-e0SdyZ17iQuWiU>
Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <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, 27 Feb 2015 17:09:17 -0000

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> wrote:
> On Feb 27, 2015, at 11:49 AM, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> wrote:
>> That would be a cultural disaster for the IETF.  If you don't have to
>> go anywhere to attend, will you even make time for more than the WG
>> meetings in which you have a direct interest?  Probably not.  And what
>> of all the hallway and bar BoFs?  Gone.
>
> Ubiquitous WiFi in meeting rooms has already made it the case that only those people who want to actually attend to the sessions where their bodies are parked.   This is just the cross-area review problem wearing another hat.   I agree it's a problem, but I don't think the fact that people fly in for meetings makes it less of a problem.

That's true as to attendance of WG meetings by people not actually
that interested.  Ubiquitous wifi has not negatively affected hallway
conversations (not that much anyways) nor bar BoFs (not at all).

Nico
--

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email