Re: Registration details for IETF 108

Randy Bush <> Thu, 11 June 2020 12:02 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFF353A0598 for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 05:02:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IguCahExvj0k for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 05:02:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C95193A0544 for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 05:01:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([] by with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <>) id 1jjLtv-0002d5-9G; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:01:43 +0000
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 05:01:42 -0700
Message-ID: <>
From: Randy Bush <>
To: Tim Chown <>
Cc: IETF Rinse Repeat <>
Subject: Re: Registration details for IETF 108
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <01d701d638ca$c096b5e0$41c421a0$> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <1UWAyqDxFn.1IOJoXgqe8i@pc8xp> <> <> <> <>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/26.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:02:06 -0000

>> let me see if i can push you just a little bit out of the box.  a
>> small step.
>> there are two time slots in the day which work for what i call three
>> continent calls, apac, emea/africa, noam/alyc.  each day a different
>> wg meets in one of those two slots of *their* choice.  thus the ietf
>> 'meeting' is smeared over three months.
> Keep pushing.
> And this would win us a schedule free of WG meeting clashes, and
> avoidance of several hundred drafts being published in 24 hours with
> very little hope of reading the ones that interest you before the WG
> meeting.
> Many WGs are already embracing more frequent online interims, so
> “smearing” the work is already happening.  The question is whether
> some structure like the above is preferred, or ad-hoc meetings as and
> when each WG wants them.

an example

TMA2020, which i am attending as i type, is a more classic format,
mixing zoom and slack, and is time skewed somewhat to try to have a
timezone footprint which is not too onerous for asia and the americas.
but they tried to innovate in the discussions, per-paper slack channels,
interactive q&a, etc.

maybe the hardest part is what our community refers to as 'the hallway.'
i am looking for communities trying to innovate in this space.  imiho,
this is really important.  i can read your paper/draft/...  and zoom +q
interaction is about as good as the mic line.  but hanging out,
discussing, gossiping, ...  is more important to us funny monkeys the
tools seem to support.