Re: [Manycouches] [admin-discuss] Follow up on consultation on planning for IETF 111

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 12-Apr-21 14:45, John C Klensin wrote:
> 
> 
> --On Sunday, April 11, 2021 17:29 -0700 Fred Baker
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>> On Apr 11, 2021, at 1:17 PM, Andrew Campling
>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Without these in-person meetings I believe that the IETF
>>> risks fracturing into a number of largely separate activities
>>> with minimal overlap, increasingly driven by the interests of
>>> companies and with little regard for the "big picture".
>>> In-person meetings build a sense of community as well as
>>> fostering the cross-pollination of ideas, diluting the former
>>> risks harming the community over the medium-term.  
>>
>> I am of a similar opinion/concern.
> 
> To be clear, I agree.  I was not proposing elimination of
> in-person meetings and one of my biggest concerns about the IETF
> in recent years is that several activities seem to be sliding
> toward isolated activities and losing that big picture, since of
> community, etc.  The question I think is worth asking --and the
> one I, perhaps incorrectly, took Brian as asking-- is about how
> many of those meetings we need.   

Exactly.

> More specifically, is the
> incremental value of three meetings a year over two meetings a
> year, or over five meetings in two years, high enough to justify
> the additional costs (to the IETF and to participants), travel
> time, etc.  Conversely, if we need three meetings a year to
> foster the sense of community and other good things you are
> talking about, would we be even better off with four a year or
> some other larger number?

Those are the questions, but I would also like carbon emissions to
be considered. It would be nice if there is still a civilisation
when IPv6 runs out of addresses, and that means everybody doing
their share to reduce emissions.

[A side issue is that somebody should do a serious evaluation of
the energy balance of a remote vs a face-to-face meeting. They
both have energy costs.]

When I first encountered video conferencing over the Internet,
around 1991, I quickly developed a rule of thumb that meeting
that way worked well with people you met face to face at least
once a year, but quite badly with people you met rarely or never.
Maybe some sociologist has studied this properly, but my starting
bid is that two f2f meetings a year, with on-line meetings in
between, would be enough to keep the IETF functioning socially.
I think we've already seen evidence that more than a year between
meetings is socially damaging, which is rather what I expected.

Regards
   Brian