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

[Nick Doty <[e-mail]>]

On May 13, 2020, at 1:58 PM, Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On 13/05/2020 18:08, Alissa Cooper wrote:
>> 
>> The charter is scoped narrowly to only deal with cancellation of
>> previously planned in-person meetings. There are other related topics
>> that need community guidance — the nomcom eligibility criteria that
>> is already being worked on (see [e-mail]
>> <mailto:[e-mail]>), the overall meeting cadence
>> and mix of in-person versus virtual meetings in the future, how to
>> craft the meeting experience at an in-person meeting when
>> significantly more people are remote, etc. But just the cancellation
>> topics on their own will require a bunch of work and may attract
>> different participants than those interested in other topics, so the
>> boundary is drawn there.
> FWIW, I'm supportive. I'm also ok with the charter not
> including "should we keep planning 3 f2f meetings per
> year?" but I'd be even happier if that question were
> also included as in scope, perhaps relating to a milestone
> that's scheduled to be discussed only after the initial
> work is done.

+1 that this work seems useful and it would seem even more useful to me if we also included discussion about whether we plan as many f2f meetings and what alternatives there are. Even just for cancellation of previously scheduled in-person meetings, we will at some point have a meeting that could feasibly go ahead (that is, might have enough attendees and might not be an enormous direct risk to public health) and IESG et al will have to decide how holding that in-person meeting would compare to a variety of Stay Home Meet Online alternatives. Shouldn’t we discuss those alternatives in the same Stay Home Meet Online group? And if not -- and I mean this as a genuine question -- where should that work take place instead?

Regarding scope:
> Technology functionality requirements for the technologies the IETF uses to support fully online meetings.
> 
> Specifications of details concerning cancellation criteria, meeting technologies, and online meeting agenda formats and content are out of scope.

Developing functionality requirements for meeting technologies while avoiding specifying details concerning meeting technologies seems a narrow path to walk. I’m not sure what is in or out of scope there.

Hope you and yours are well,
Nick