Re: Structure of IETF meeting weeks

Dave Crocker <> Wed, 19 April 2017 16:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 852601293E9 for <>; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 09:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.791
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)"
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SyFG7wM5OJhJ for <>; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 09:23:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8B5C128CB9 for <>; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 09:23:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id v3JGPD4k017170 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 19 Apr 2017 09:25:14 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=default; t=1492619114; bh=5OJDfNo6rzCVm+jD5wCojMCLe3VNsbyc4Yxe+xBGPuo=; h=Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=mGyey36Y8Tr9BvE+r7Bg/WBSlxfdEj0W11OCh5NDEIJi3W9EYG/odM0mNsT1OOS1D DM6OHNNtGA2KLsktbpomFwT8rVzkcbhZOJwO00kDD9koUr4yP0hSFU07cpI87wGTRs 8GxVhv01ai9ra/lnwzwAc+GHUxHVnef6HCXdTpWo=
Subject: Re: Structure of IETF meeting weeks
To: joel jaeggli <>, Stephen Farrell <>, Toerless Eckert <>, Michael Richardson <>
References: <> <> <20170411232408.GE48535@verdi> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Dave Crocker <>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 09:22:48 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 16:23:05 -0000

On 4/19/2017 9:16 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> As an AD I was relatively assiduous at working with my chairs to cancel
> working group slots where the agenda/acitivity didn't justify meeting
> (beyond the case of the empty agenda that's probably somewhat subjective).

Thanks for checking off that script requirement in this sequence.  When 
discussing such management issues on the we always get one or more 
postings following the template "my management oversight did/does what 
you are suggesting".

As always, individual anecdotes have nothing to do with patterns of 
concern.  It's not that they are untrue, it's that they are a single 
datum, which never explains or resolves a pattern.

Note, for example Ted Lemon's view that meaningful filtering isn't 
possible due to individual differences in defining an applying criteria.

All of this, of course, provides continuing comfort in taking no action 
to manage the week's time better.


Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking