Re: [Manycouches] IETF 109 Preliminary Agenda

[Jay Daley <[e-mail]>]

> On 20/10/2020, at 9:26 AM, Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> Of course the sessions for existing working groups are the bulk of the sessions
> 
> One could argue that those are the meetings that least need to be in a specified
> magic week, since they could be held any time.

One could, but 82% of respondents to that survey think otherwise.  We had ~500 responses from a population of meeting attendees of say ~5k giving a margin of error of just over 4%.

Jay

> BOFs, initial meetings, and traditionally plenary events can clearly all benefit from a global schedule.
> 
> Regards
>   Brian
> 
> On 20-Oct-20 09:19, Jay Daley wrote:
>> Adrian
>> 
>>> On 20/10/2020, at 7:49 AM, Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> This thread (re-)opens the question of the value of a full virtual meeting.
>>> 
>>> There is unquestionable (to me) value in the plenary session, and a few of
>>> the agenda-slot meetings are widely attended.
>>> 
>>> But it seems that the main draw of an in-person meeting is the interactions
>>> in the corridors and after people have spoken at agenda sessions. Also the
>>> ad hoc gatherings to advance topics. 
>>> It seems to me that most/all of this was missing at IETF-108 and is likely
>>> to be missing at IETF-109.
>>> 
>>> So what is left between the packed one-week agenda and a sparse three-month
>>> schedule of "interims".
>>> 
>>> Maybe the only benefit I can see is that rather than having to be out of bed
>>> every week for a poorly-scheduled interim, I can be out of bed for a whole
>>> week for the IETF week. I am not sure that is an advantage, especially when
>>> weighed against agenda clashes (at IETF-108 I tried listening to multiple
>>> audio streams at once, and it fried my poor brain).
>>> 
>>> So I'd like to see a renewed discussion of why we are doing this to
>>> ourselves.
>> 
>> Just a reminder that we have surveyed the community about this
>> 
>> 	https://www.ietf.org/media/documents/survey-planning-possible-online-meetings-responses.pdf
>> 
>> One key question was "If an in-person one-week IETF meeting needs to be cancelled then which of the following options do you prefer?", which elicited the following responses (p20):
>> 
>> - Replace it with a combination of an online meeting with a set agenda and virtual interims				36.15% 	184
>> - Replace it with an online meeting with a set agenda (format to be decided)						29.47% 	150
>> - Ask WGs/RGs to schedule virtual interims when and how they want								14.54% 	74
>> - Ask WGs/RGs to schedule virtual interims following rules about when and how (rules to be decided)	9.82% 	50
>> - Don't know																			5.11% 	26
>> - Do nothing and defer until the next in-person meeting											2.95% 	15
>> - Other (please specify)																	1.96% 	10
>> 
>> 
>> It might be argued that an online meeting with just a plenary meets the top two results above, but then a further question asks "If an online IETF meeting is scheduled, then how important is it for each of the following to be included?", which elicited the following responses (p26):
>> 
>> (From L-R: Very important, Important, Neutral, Not important, Not at all important, Score (lower score is more important))
>> 
>> - Sessions for existing working groups 		43.66% 38.05% 12.06% 4.99% 1.25% 		1.82
>> - Sessions for new working groups			39.02% 39.91% 16.19% 2.66% 2.22% 		1.89
>> - BOFs 								38.12% 36.32% 21.08% 2.24% 2.24% 		1.94
>> - Sessions for proposed research groups	19.48% 36.15% 34.27% 6.81% 3.29% 		2.38
>> - Sessions for existing research groups		19.25% 34.51% 36.38% 7.28% 2.58% 		2.39
>> - Plenary session 						21.81% 28.19% 31.28% 13.88% 4.85% 	2.52
>> - Side meetings 						14.99% 29.98% 32.08% 13.11% 9.84% 	2.73
>> - Newcomers’ events					13.00% 28.25% 34.00% 12.00% 12.75% 	2.83
>> - Technical tutorials 					11.14% 20.54% 40.35% 17.33% 10.64%	2.96
>> - HotRFC								9.49% 19.49% 41.79% 15.64% 13.59% 	3.04
>> - Office hours							5.34% 22.90% 39.95% 20.10% 11.70%		3.10
>> - Hackathon 							6.73% 20.20% 40.65% 19.70% 12.72% 	3.11
>> - Codesprint 							3.20% 12.00% 48.27% 20.27% 16.27%		3.34
>> - Host Speaker Series 					5.85% 15.78% 35.11% 21.12% 22.14%		3.38
>> - Systers Networking 					4.68% 10.23% 47.95% 15.20% 21.93%		3.39
>> - Social event 							4.99% 8.48% 23.44% 20.95% 42.14%		3.87
>> 
>> Of course the sessions for existing working groups are the bulk of the sessions.
>> 
>> Jay
>> 
>> 
> 

-- 
Jay Daley
IETF Executive Director
[e-mail]