Re: [Mtgvenue] Spencer Dawkins' Yes on draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-15: (with COMMENT)

Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com> Wed, 06 June 2018 02:33 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0FCB130E32; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 19:33:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=qti.qualcomm.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JFffpAealACG; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 19:33:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com (wolverine01.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.254]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A24C130E30; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 19:33:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qti.qualcomm.com; i=@qti.qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1528252406; x=1559788406; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version; bh=SceHtERtq8lAMWoMDWluLWRqJ45qif8qAMdQl9LJcdA=; b=Bo2YzfEqZIkNoX7oC5NFGoVG3/Hf8NRZzq3Dikee4t28Kjcbk8NCU0hg GXZsJVeC5mGOhbQUDd5sZ03oRlRgsrPqXF4qklGx1P19B35WbhzVdy3CH JHx+7VBkfzkvruqpylC5wXC4fw4kQJyk5wJPlNEgPqStrJn5wN2NDhFi+ c=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,481,1520924400"; d="scan'208";a="343669296"
Received: from unknown (HELO ironmsg-SD-alpha.qualcomm.com) ([10.53.140.30]) by wolverine01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 05 Jun 2018 19:33:25 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5900,7806,8915"; a="213810372"
Received: from nasanexm01f.na.qualcomm.com ([10.85.0.32]) by ironmsg-SD-alpha.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 05 Jun 2018 19:33:25 -0700
Received: from [10.38.246.13] (10.80.80.8) by NASANEXM01F.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1365.1; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 19:33:24 -0700
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
To: Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
CC: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, <draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process@ietf.org>, <mtgvenue-chairs@ietf.org>, <mtgvenue@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 21:33:57 -0500
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.11.2r5479)
Message-ID: <D6D8F852-1AC5-4DE0-BFDE-1CF063211765@qti.qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <152823546557.19203.3421488213161217390.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <152823546557.19203.3421488213161217390.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
X-Originating-IP: [10.80.80.8]
X-ClientProxiedBy: NASANEXM01B.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.82) To NASANEXM01F.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.32)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mtgvenue/IOyQuhpGJ6Wtk50Swp_f-mLLXNI>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] Spencer Dawkins' Yes on draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-15: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: mtgvenue@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for email discussion of the IAOC meeting venue selection process." <mtgvenue.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mtgvenue/>
List-Post: <mailto:mtgvenue@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 02:33:29 -0000

Hi Spencer,

Thanks for the comments. Some replies below:

On 5 Jun 2018, at 16:51, Spencer Dawkins wrote:

> I like where the exchange on Martin's comment has ended up.  Thanks 
> for that.

You're very welcome. I think the WG had the same intention, and the 
verbiage is easy to add.

> Everything following my first comment is editorial (at most).
>
> Given that we have an active effort to produce IASA 2.0, is
>
>    As always, the community is
>    encouraged to provide direct feedback to the Nominations Committee
>    (NOMCOM), Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), and IAB
>    regarding the discharge of the IASA's performance.
>
> going to age well?

We did discuss this with our AD. Indeed, that's why we removed a bunch 
of text about IASA/IAOC procedure. But I believe (and our AD or editor 
can correct me if I'm wrong) the conclusion we came to is that the text 
here is OK. My presumption is that whatever IASA 2.0 comes up with, it 
will either call itself "IASA" or lay out how tasks from older documents 
are mapped to newly named structures.

> I think
>
>   Focus:
>       We meet to have focused technical discussions.  These are not
>       limited to scheduled breakout sessions, although of course those
>       are important.  They also happen over meals or drinks -- 
> including
>       a specific type of non-session that we call a "Bar BOF" 
> [RFC6771]
>       - or in side meetings.
>
> should have the reference at the end of the sentence, as in
>
>  Focus:
>       We meet to have focused technical discussions.  These are not
>       limited to scheduled breakout sessions, although of course those
>       are important.  They also happen over meals or drinks -- 
> including
>       a specific type of non-session that we call a "Bar BOF" or side
>       meeting [RFC6771].
>
> [RFC6771] uses both terms interchangeably.

Seems reasonable.

> Not asking for a text change on this, but I wonder when the last 
> meeting was
>
>   o  The Facility's support technologies and services -- network,
>       audio-video, etc. -- are sufficient for the anticipated 
> activities
>       at the meeting, or the Facility is willing to add such
>       infrastructure or these support technologies and services might 
> be
>       provided by a third party, all at no -- or at an acceptable --
>       cost to the IETF.
>
> where the Facility provided these things at no cost to the IETF ...

Hmmm....I took it to mean that a third party might provide them at no 
cost, but I see the ambiguity now that you ask that question. I don't 
know the answer to your question, and perhaps the editor can explain the 
intent of the sentence to clarify.

> I wonder if "something of a preference for" is easy for ESL folk.
>
>   o  We have something of a preference for an IETF meeting to be under
>       "One Roof".  That is, qualified meeting space and guest rooms 
> are
>       available in the same facility.
>
> I note that the following bullets are all "it is desirable".

I believe that this text was to state the "preference" more softly. 
Perhaps even, "There is some preference for"?

> This is a side question for the AD

I will leave it to her.

Cheers,

pr

> but I note that we've started including
> long-lived URLs in RFCs, and I wonder if a URL could be selected to 
> include in
> this text:
>
> 4.  Documentation Requirements
>
>    The IETF Community works best when it is well informed.  This memo
>    does not specify processes nor who has responsibility for 
> fulfilling
>    our requirements for meetings.  Nevertheless, both of these aspects
>    are important.  Therefore, the IASA SHALL publicly document and 
> keep
>    current both a list of roles and responsibilities relating to IETF
>    meetings, as well as the selection processes they use in order to
>    fulfill the requirements of the community.
>
> ISTM that people would click on it more often if they didn't have to 
> search for
> it ...