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

[Flemming Andreasen <[e-mail]>]

Our expectation is that there will be many questions and comments on 
each of the plan presentations as we go through them, hence the 1 hour 
allocation for each suggested. Furthermore, we wanted to ensure that 
each plan got it's fair share of time allocated to discussion. The 
remaining 40 mins were intended to be more open-ended discussion based 
on what we have heard and discussed for each plan by then.

Based on the above, please let us know if folks still feel the agenda 
should be modified.

Thanks

-- Flemming


On 6/15/13 5:39 AM, Harald Alvestrand 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
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
> .
>