Re: [Manycouches] Stay Home Meet Online (SHMO) draft and proposed WG

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es> Thu, 14 May 2020 14:27 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=1403f52c4b=jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
X-Original-To: manycouches@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manycouches@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7AA13A0AA7 for <manycouches@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 May 2020 07:27:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=consulintel.es
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 JLjOtouAETzW for <manycouches@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 May 2020 07:27:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.consulintel.es (mail.consulintel.es [IPv6:2001:470:1f09:495::5]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D19E3A0A9A for <manycouches@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 May 2020 07:27:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=consulintel.es; s=MDaemon; t=1589466466; x=1590071266; i=jordi.palet@consulintel.es; q=dns/txt; h=User-Agent:Date: Subject:From:To:Message-ID:Thread-Topic:References:In-Reply-To: Mime-version:Content-type:Content-transfer-encoding; bh=E6TJYDrN vmfkE+zZ5UW/fH9edtUIl0rqrt5SMHPLJNo=; b=P5wbJQ58hnkTcy0YXeVL/8uH 4wbmiSOwXooA59c1QbaY91wUkwocR/5XZ7b44R33ssLMMUL0zXHdctF1g/9EJORB kx/nHJaitK6F6+zFrAexV8DpNgsgdejoG62J11p5F4dwciOnOFJoT7/uP+yOOE5u gSFnmGMlAdyuy4H4R4c=
X-MDAV-Result: clean
X-MDAV-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Thu, 14 May 2020 16:27:46 +0200
X-Spam-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Thu, 14 May 2020 16:27:46 +0200
Received: from [10.10.10.144] by mail.consulintel.es (MDaemon PRO v16.5.2) with ESMTPA id md50000161701.msg for <manycouches@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 May 2020 16:27:45 +0200
X-MDRemoteIP: 2001:470:1f09:495:ccbe:bb33:47be:af4f
X-MDHelo: [10.10.10.144]
X-MDArrival-Date: Thu, 14 May 2020 16:27:45 +0200
X-Authenticated-Sender: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
X-Return-Path: prvs=1403f52c4b=jordi.palet@consulintel.es
X-Envelope-From: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: manycouches@ietf.org
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.37.20051002
Date: Thu, 14 May 2020 16:27:45 +0200
From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
To: manycouches@ietf.org
Message-ID: <11257815-8ACD-4B13-9913-083BEC538796@consulintel.es>
Thread-Topic: [Manycouches] Stay Home Meet Online (SHMO) draft and proposed WG
References: <E103897C-F9D9-4ED3-AB45-FD2967D7F49E@cooperw.in> <3844.1589465784@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <3844.1589465784@localhost>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manycouches/5SBrZ_x3tBRxeEx_EEdFmd7AcZ0>
Subject: Re: [Manycouches] Stay Home Meet Online (SHMO) draft and proposed WG
X-BeenThere: manycouches@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List is a design team list to identify issues that would arise should an IETF meeting ever be held with O\(1000\) 'remote' participants." <manycouches.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manycouches>, <mailto:manycouches-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manycouches/>
List-Post: <mailto:manycouches@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manycouches-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manycouches>, <mailto:manycouches-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 May 2020 14:27:51 -0000

    I also wonder if "mtgvenue" shouldn't just be rechartered to do this work.
    We are basically trying to establish a higher-order set of meeting "venue"
    criteria.

[Jordi] I think that's make sense, because I've the feeling that we may need also to update a little bit something in the previous documents.

    This is insufficiently detailed for me to understand what details are out of
    scope.  I can understand that we aren't writing an RFP for tools development,
    but it seems that we actually do want to establish some requirements.
    The IPv6 as a mandatory requirement discussion would seem to fit.

[Jordi] I think it is a different document. The decisions about the tools must be the same regardless if we have in-person or on-line meetings. It is not just IPv6. I've already a draft of this document since a few days ago ... just waiting my co-author to review it before publishing.




**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.