Re: IETF Meeting Room Space Availability Policy

Jari -
Good clarifications. Yes, this is for *additional* meeting rooms. I like the idea of bar BOFs and design teams.

What does the community think about disclosure requirements for directly-IETF-related work?  For example, and I am thinking out loud as a community member, I would expect *some* form of announcement for work group activities, even if a closed design team.  That seems to me to be smack in the middle of the IETF openness philosophy.  Conversely, I do not see any requirement or, for that matter, benefit from announcing non-IETF-related meetings, like corporate meetings.  I would *not* want meeting room rental to somehow become a marketing tool by virtue of being listed in any IETF announcement.

--
- Eric

On May 19, 2010, at 9:19 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:

> 
> On May 19, 2010, at 8:06 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:
> 
>> Ray,
>> 
>> Thanks for this. I think the policy is a necessary one, and both the policy and the ability to book space is useful for the IETF community at large.
>> 
>> I did have a few issues with the details, however. Inline:
>> 
>>> Group Categories
>>> 
>>> A.  Working Groups, BOFs and Community Work Groups
>>> 
>>> 1. There is no charge for the room for these groups.  Charges may apply for third party provided audio visual equipment and services, phone services, and food and beverages.
>>> 2. The approval of the IETF Chair or AD is required. The IETF Chair or AD will notify the Senior Meeting Planner of the approval.  If space is available the Planner will accommodate the request.
>>> 3.  Working Groups have first priority for reservations made up to noon of the day before; thereafter, rooms will be assigned on a first come, first served basis
>> 
>> 
>> I think it would be good to clarify that your policy above relates to *additional* meeting space needed beyond the usual WG meetings. (Regular meetings are approved under a different process, one slot meeting request for instance requires no AD approval.)
>> 
>>> 4.  Community Work includes that of the IETF, IAB, IRTF, RSE, ISE, and IAOC (not in a priority order)
>>> 
>> ... and design teams? (This is the most frequent request that I get, at least)
>> 
>> ... and maybe (non)bar BoFs should be mentioned somehow as well. I'm raising this because its not necessarily clear what "community working group" actually is.
>> 
>> ... and perhaps it deserves to be mentioned that the offer applies for both open and closed groups. Design teams can be closed, for instance, and I still want to grant them rooms to meet in.
>> 
>> What about the nomcom?
>> 
>>> 5.  The Meeting Host, sponsors and the Internet Society have priority for room requests until two weeks prior to the meeting; thereafter space will be provided on a first come, first serve basis.  There will be no grandfathering.
>>> 
>> 
>> Speaking as someone who has been involved in acquiring meeting space for company internal meetings at IETF sites, I wonder if the two week part above is really necessary. It would be more convenient if I could confirm space earlier. Perhaps you could just say that the sponsor, ISOC, host have priority. I think they too have planned their needs in further advance than two weeks.
> 
> I think you are misreading this. This does not mean that you can't request space earlier, or even that you can't be confirmed earlier, just that after T - 2 weeks it goes to purely first come first service.
> 
> Regards
> Marshall
> 
> 
>> 
>> Jari
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ietf mailing list
>> Ietf@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>> 
> 