Re: [MMUSIC] MMUSIC WG June 17th virtual interim agenda

Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com> Sat, 15 June 2013 18:22 UTC

Return-Path: <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 492A621F9E02 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:22:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.269
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.269 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.330, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QXF8xLgJ3WcD for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:22:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qe0-f49.google.com (mail-qe0-f49.google.com [209.85.128.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 099BB21F9E00 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:22:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qe0-f49.google.com with SMTP id cz11so961735qeb.36 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:22:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0tOTs9q8m1MOObGIp0je/kp/Two5MLcODdM7kV+NykY=; b=zpJLnqvE6SQSerwWYj9WLRK4/9ON+gTYhvvbNVkjwNCaSgzlPiZjf4dA/QsHxd9aZv EnM3We/DJYOoLGdMnLQ92FZgdlBXs9eo/VV+xTKLkUhkNWi9FDo20XVW0eajMxa1X6Az y6vRuReO6jb/RWJv0xCFiS2QVsoR1a3rHIlpkZXsBCwRcde0tSrwcX/QZpyReSHYM+Mj rxWIOq+jZ6XJYO0whmFDF9Eu0E0kcISg0AALOaPQDtdUvEThkm6EPp1D9hCEStg4vVY4 PBX1eBO9wZ9l9DI73Ko67gajn+B1vcaBAvLY806cC/R0eACl8gFRVYDT0MXs3cAdVTmP T8gg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.229.106.18 with SMTP id v18mr3205083qco.49.1371320563360; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:22:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.49.117.130 with HTTP; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:22:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51BC3661.6050603@alvestrand.no>
References: <51BB5EFE.5090903@ericsson.com> <51BC3661.6050603@alvestrand.no>
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 13:22:43 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHBDyN7Mgv9riHKWk5HE93agO0OCEHuEvVWFhk0LG1z3zNjBFg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] MMUSIC WG June 17th virtual interim agenda
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:22:48 -0000

An excellent suggestion.  I had been putting together an email on just
this topic as it wasn't all clear to me what the objectives were and
who was really leading the meeting and discussions.

Mary.

On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 4:39 AM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
> Not on A vs B, but on the agenda:
>
> This time allocation is:
>
> - 20 mins administrativia
> - 120 mins presentation
> - 40 mins discussion
>
> I do not think this is a wise allocation. It maximizes the time given to
> plan "owners" to present their viewpoints, and minimizes the time avaliable
> for people who do not "own a plan" to present a viewpoint.
> People who come to the meeting SHOULD have read the drafts beforehand. If
> not, listening to 60 mins of presentation won't make them understand the
> issues.
>
> I would suggest instead:
>
> - 10 min administrativia (agenda bash)
> - 15 min Plan A presentation
> - 15 min Plan A clarification questions
> - 15 min Plan B presentation
> - 15 min Plan B clarification questions
> - 10 min presentaton on "what questions do we need to answer" (by the
> chairs)
> - 90 min discussion on answering the questions (structured by the chairs)
> - 10 min administrativia (wrapup)
>
> (and yes, this is enough time that one could fit in a slot for "no plan"
> too)
>
> (I'm HOPING that the draft agenda is intended to show "presentation and
> discussion" for each draft, not what the words on the agenda currently say.
> But if not, I'm considering whether calling in 2 hours late is a reasonable
> option.)
>
>
>
> On 06/14/2013 08:20 PM, Ari Keränen wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Given the guidance from the RTCWEB WG chairs that the "no-plan" discussion
>> should essentially happen at the RTCWEB WG, the MMUSIC interim meeting on
>> June 17th will be focused on Plan A and Plan B. The goal of the meeting is
>> to clarify what are the two different plans, what are their key differences
>> and merits, and how can we select one to move forward with.
>>
>> Here's the draft agenda:
>>
>> 7:00 – 7:10 Agenda bash & Note takers
>> 7:10 – 8:10 Plan A Presentation
>>  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-roach-rtcweb-plan-a-00
>>  (also http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-roach-rtcweb-glareless-add-00)
>> 8:10 – 9:10 Plan B Presentation
>>   http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-uberti-rtcweb-plan-00
>> 9:10 – 9:50 Discussion on preferred approach
>> 9:50 – 10:00 Wrap-Up & Next Steps
>>
>> Note: All Times are Pacific Daylight Time (PDT)
>>
>>
>> The WebEx information for joining the meeting is available here:
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic/current/msg11488.html
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ari & Flemming (MMUSIC co-chairs)
>> _______________________________________________
>> mmusic mailing list
>> mmusic@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic