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

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Sat, 15 June 2013 09:39 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 859DE21F8C20 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 02:39:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, 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 h-cVwapj0ytK for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 02:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68CAC21F896D for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 02:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 318E339E0F0 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:39:47 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MrVm3VmhRzg0 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:39:46 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [172.30.42.116] (c-e2fee555.03-217-73746f1.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se [85.229.254.226]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0E57E39E029 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:39:46 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <51BC3661.6050603@alvestrand.no>
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:39:45 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mmusic@ietf.org
References: <51BB5EFE.5090903@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <51BB5EFE.5090903@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
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 09:39:53 -0000

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