Re: [nfsv4] Potential schedules for BakeAThons in 2011

"Erasani, Pranoop" <Pranoop.Erasani@netapp.com> Mon, 11 October 2010 18:08 UTC

Return-Path: <Pranoop.Erasani@netapp.com>
X-Original-To: nfsv4@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nfsv4@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DB9D3A6B52 for <nfsv4@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:08:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.941
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.739, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uTp2piilyu86 for <nfsv4@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:07:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2.netapp.com (mx2.netapp.com [216.240.18.37]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C64153A6B47 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:07:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.57,315,1283756400"; d="scan'208,217"; a="465898311"
Received: from smtp2.corp.netapp.com ([10.57.159.114]) by mx2-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 11 Oct 2010 11:08:56 -0700
Received: from sacrsexc1-prd.hq.netapp.com (sacrsexc1-prd.hq.netapp.com [10.99.115.27]) by smtp2.corp.netapp.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/NTAP-1.6) with ESMTP id o9BI8uef028884; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SACMVEXC3-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([10.99.115.21]) by sacrsexc1-prd.hq.netapp.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:08:56 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CB696F.5E608695"
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:08:55 -0700
Message-ID: <43EEF8704A569749804F545E3306FCE33E11D9@SACMVEXC3-PRD.hq.netapp.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [nfsv4] Potential schedules for BakeAThons in 2011
Thread-Index: ActpZX9MKXug9y3qRo2EW7tulfLSuwAAyGeD
References: <9C0FE01C-2ECC-468D-AC32-524191536058@netapp.com><4CB30E70.3080200@RedHat.com><9af8934019c8f3d84432b005ce087796.squirrel@webmail.eisler.com><BF3BB6D12298F54B89C8DCC1E4073D80027DD7A6@CORPUSMX50A.corp.emc.com> <79D854E7-E596-4560-9440-9735AD4A4349@netapp.com>
From: "Erasani, Pranoop" <Pranoop.Erasani@netapp.com>
To: "Haynes, Tom" <Thomas.Haynes@netapp.com>, <david.noveck@emc.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Oct 2010 18:08:56.0038 (UTC) FILETIME=[5EA57860:01CB696F]
Cc: nfsv4@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Potential schedules for BakeAThons in 2011
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: NFSv4 Working Group <nfsv4.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nfsv4>
List-Post: <mailto:nfsv4@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 18:08:00 -0000

> 2) honestly, even with the IETF meeting being in the US, more people
attend a BAT than an IETF meeting. I.e., I don't think the savings would
be that huge per company.
 
Honestly, that cannot be a factor against that proposal.
 
That may be tue today. Because, folks like me that don't have an active proposal to present/discuss think that it's not a good use of their time to attend IETF, especially if I have to be conscious of my day-to-day job. If you align bakeathon with it, then they might come or vice-versa.
 
I think we are swayed too much by the urge to hold it in europe. No one seems to have any data on how many additional folks would attend bakeathon, if that is held outside US. If there was some, please do share. Also, weigh it against how many US regulars would not be able to make it to the event.
 
Just to reiterate, my comment is not about "DONT ever hold it in europe".
 
On the face of it, on the personal front, I certainly would not be able to attend, if it is held in europe. If I have to combine the trip with something like IETF, then I could consider.
 
- Pranoop

________________________________

From: Haynes, Tom
Sent: Mon 10/11/2010 9:58 AM
To: david.noveck@emc.com
Cc: nfsv4@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Potential schedules for BakeAThons in 2011




On Oct 11, 2010, at 11:44 AM, <david.noveck@emc.com> wrote:

>> I suggest amortizing travel costs to align with an IETF
>> meeting (most of much are no longer in the USA).
>
>> http://www.ietf.org/meeting/upcoming.html does not show
>> Paris as future venue, though there are several European
>> meetings planned with TBD as the venue.
>
> I think Mike makes a good point about amortizing travel costs.
>
> I believe that having the events in the exact same city is not required
> to provide that amortization.  Paris and Prague are 550 miles apart.  I
> haven't got into the details of flight costs but I'd expect we are not
> talking major bucks here.
>


The main problems with that proposal are that

1) ConnectAThon is traditionally in that time frame and,

2) honestly, even with the IETF meeting being in the US, more people
attend a BAT than an IETF meeting. I.e., I don't think the savings would
be that huge per company.

_______________________________________________
nfsv4 mailing list
nfsv4@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4