Re: 10 a.m.

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Mon, 11 July 2016 16:13 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
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 22EE512D5A5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:13:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 khpMalR7kB5J for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:13:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22d.google.com (mail-lf0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22d]) (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 5890412D592 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:13:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id h129so77319019lfh.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:13:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=rS20ginLu1WlAdQLHR7yTxv1cpoHrA7fOZCCATbGOOo=; b=0oGCpuia0Tp5xXPn1VlGNcJOsuoEBgPD8ZEzQN4qeE3XCbAy61qs4IDYe9PjxUB7jm T3On4902C7JEcqM3WEUUSjEzL9YWWbukVamY4wxge5PxOoQFyDtFx/zNOT8PjA4pj3Or cMBIOzx7Er/S+jy1WGKlWRIVcxx/q949M6S7TDwzEoH82LVHeUpUZtWqU0mN9GCOBzba AkovcZWWHJyo/3Dfx/QBTBblLV0Qmxkt/19PZ5X81iTtTEUKjAxetmnTCyZ+/pJnFT9m ZUd0CLZ4xBLn7xvBq5uig3GjzKw4HPCmDc888BBrOGIwQXHcZ+TBJUBgraNjmYN4LWWU 3ZFA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=rS20ginLu1WlAdQLHR7yTxv1cpoHrA7fOZCCATbGOOo=; b=BZeajsn+Wzmh6qHjx0ub2galufFI5aAncZy4FzjVtucDLh/GFK5PxRJDocPMYzLcsH gMBcHEnkTTtsQPZ1zvRQoVj7gF36FZEY2yqZD3E3Izm0jCqkvNr3hOAZqcDWw6p7XsK1 hUs4SCJzWIes++gMWu+vT2+n7CvzR0nVdcYJRJ4NysxafKGoIcQ5JLdN556qYGJdgRkM YIT5ig1rZ3FjrPUShDrH2+qxtN1Jvu68uQhtBOxM86VOIhq91Ols1yOfTIZkiuFQdGBW AZM1KJXJFbPZyY9SPpvf93fB3ew8T/HA1P9g72EibujZX9sM/97KY0h8ud76/j8U/vAs Qxrw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLyIK+XLl8J51yEK2Yipwbk0JqwxoIgdUelySsijX7hWSG1HT2vCcj5lhHzOYFJehqrLSYF6ZvLBfSyEg==
X-Received: by 10.25.85.200 with SMTP id j191mr5175563lfb.39.1468253617522; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:13:37 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.217.219 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAG4d1rc5MRgA0YoE0D9W6tcjTcJErf3Qvmu6zrNNT02sJAntxw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ffde10f3-3084-3267-04bd-e052d120bc01@gmail.com> <CAG4d1rcr3Yk4iR5Q0o9vyvR7COOY+qaW2C63TM-vkaXAkqYMvQ@mail.gmail.com> <c451aacc-5d0f-bb58-2904-37d9e7df0ad8@gmail.com> <CAG4d1rc5MRgA0YoE0D9W6tcjTcJErf3Qvmu6zrNNT02sJAntxw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:12:57 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1kYF0RQ8dfJ9DGs66RpnKsk_j78gFmjT4peGiMezK8aEA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 10 a.m.
To: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11424d0c501b9805375e6f05"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/t3QMrqc9Tn4BmmHw5LdBHbQTRW0>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 16:13:42 -0000

I think for Americans (either continent) the later start time will be
slightly more comfortable anyway, so it's a good thing.   And experiments
always trip over issues.   I do not oppose this change, and I definitely
don't want to beat anybody up about it.   My remark earlier was simply to
the point that the IESG should publicize the start time in announcements
prior to the announcement of the agenda so people have more time to plan.
I personally don't think I'll get caught by this again--I usually stay
Friday night anyway, but this IETF I decided to roll the dice to get an
extra day in Paris.   Next time that idea pops into my mind, I'll take the
later (more expensive) flight. :)

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> wrote:

> Brian,
>
> My point with the Paris meeting was that after IETF 63, folks really liked
> not
> having to come back to an evening session - and now we don't.
>
> Personally, I'm up late anyway chatting - so getting an extra hour to
> sleep was
> quite nice.
>
> Alia
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Brian E Carpenter <
> brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Alia, thanks for responding.
>> On 12/07/2016 01:10, Alia Atlas wrote:
>> > Brian,
>> >
>> > In Buenos Aires, the dinner times are substantially later and the
>> schedule was
>> > adjusted to accommodate local conditions.
>>
>> Yes, I did wonder about that (and I remember non-IETF meetings in Portugal
>> and Spain where a similar schedule shift would have been appropriate)
>>
>> > There was a lot of positive feedback
>> > about the later starting time.
>>
>> Beats me. As I said, from my PoV it is an hour wasted each day. (I
>> understand
>> that many people have breakfast meetings. I have at least three myself.
>> But they're simply going to start an hour later; no win there.)
>>
>> > I'm sure you remember the Paris meeting where the IETF tried a
>> different evening
>> > schedule & it was very popular.
>>
>> Not sure which Paris meeting you're thinking of, but I do recall that
>> for IETF 63 we completely rejigged the traditional schedule to move the
>> meal breaks an hour later, but still starting at 9. That was designed to
>> match restaurant serving hours in Paris. You can see that schedule at
>> https://www.ietf.org/meeting/63/agenda-overview.html. iirc it worked
>> reasonably well.
>>
>> > So, in response to the feedback and as an experiment, the starting time
>> is later.
>> > I believe Alexa included that this was an experiment in announcements.
>>
>> Yes, but as others have pointed out that was weeks after many people made
>> their travel bookings. (Personally that isn't an issue.)
>>
>> Well, I'll give it a try ;-)
>>
>> Regards
>>    Brian
>>
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Alia
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Brian E Carpenter <
>> > brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Where do I find the discussion and subsequent rough consensus to
>> switch the
>> >> starting time of the IETF f2f meeting days to 10 a.m.?
>> >>
>> >> As far as I'm concerned that is a big mistake, wasting an hour every
>> day
>> >> and making it (even more) difficult to relax in the evenings.
>> >>
>> >> (If there is some local peculiarity in Buenos Aires and Berlin that
>> makes
>> >> this more practical, it would be interesting to know.)
>> >>
>> >> Regards
>> >>    Brian
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>