Re: For Review: IESG Statement on Guidance on Face-to-Face and Virtual Interim Meetings

Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> Fri, 11 December 2015 16:29 UTC

Return-Path: <akatlas@gmail.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 63AEF1B2CCD for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:29:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 JYUZRxsReb3s for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:29:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ob0-x233.google.com (mail-ob0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CF0E1B2CDC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:29:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by obbsd4 with SMTP id sd4so37285772obb.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:29:30 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=43H/heEJAXykGYa1i1U8neQeGh+eVRUp9/SMCRqemEU=; b=Z0Kk+2FZKSeM3BXDNtBgQ+OwhrjmdHya4rBt3RLVhMdRrGqlK3NLH6+t71a2jiNdwI z/jnrYikj8Rlq6kE9YC/I6FAjh7hIQyMeILCq+/HXBnKR2oArceyi2qGIx45sQQrQ0OT CkZsanEw3xQjhhMZTDCpStwLEGVlvwWWuMdIzNptlphcKV0eXc5AC/TyrRkTWz3JaY6B 8792sDgUPDpSDOnToSQ1d7oNCMPnuX3o4QCX2q11B01UTMNj2Kv/SinZDWt/IKZNbok3 GgQTHdjBKpB2HWb0l+0CIz6xFEskvUhizRZMqRfOvNw3Nfg78CKjT0x+v/msLZ9uuD81 In9w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.85.34 with SMTP id e2mr15576323oez.61.1449851370491; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:29:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.60.177.103 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:29:30 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <566ADF42.5050808@dcrocker.net>
References: <20151210164031.22024.98672.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEBFAA5@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <A588E0AF-ADA4-4A3B-8C53-264A7812B1E0@piuha.net> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEC023E@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <566A95C3.8040106@cisco.com> <87ACBDDF-4D38-4FCC-BF62-BB334AEB2C7E@lucidvision.com> <566ADF42.5050808@dcrocker.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 11:29:30 -0500
Message-ID: <CAG4d1rdACmqaVt7Hugi-pygg+GFWObJj2ixcaGZMcyUKecbngA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: For Review: IESG Statement on Guidance on Face-to-Face and Virtual Interim Meetings
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
To: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e0111c484ea578d0526a1d38b"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/s3DGTnXRZn0UZyMq5DEGpQMQBsA>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
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: <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: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 16:29:35 -0000

Dave,

[off-topic] inline

On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote:

> On 12/11/2015 6:19 AM, Nadeau Thomas wrote:
> > I agree. Groups should actually be free to use whatever tools make sense
> > for the task at hand.... It
> > shouldn’t matter as long as the collaboration is as effective as possible
> > for the participants.
>
>
> As a philosophical point, that first sentence sounds great.  As a
> practical one, the latter sentence makes the philosophic
> insufficiently-specified...
>
> To be inclusive, the operation of the group must rely on use of tools
> that are known to be widely and easily usable, in the IETF context, by
> essentially anyone wishing to participate.  That permits quite a bit of
> variation, but not infinite variation.  Limiting the choices to tools
> that have an established track record in the IETF removes risk from the
> meeting activity.
>
> Obviously there need to be ways to add new tools, but let's separate
> those and class them as 'experiments'.
>
> In fact a missing bit of IETF procedural documentation is a listing of
> tools that have been found to be both usable and useful, and in what
> ways they've been useful.
>

Agreed - I've been trying to encourage having a wiki page on the
different tools.  I think it'd be excellent to see more of that.

Regards,
Alia



> Hmmm...
>
> d/
>
> --
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net
>
>