Re: [nfsv4] Potential schedules for BakeAThons in 2011

<david.noveck@emc.com> Mon, 11 October 2010 16:43 UTC

Return-Path: <david.noveck@emc.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 177523A6B12 for <nfsv4@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 09:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.187
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.187 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.588, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_AFFORDABLE=1, 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 cvKgMMADax2W for <nfsv4@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 09:43:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (mexforward.lss.emc.com [128.222.32.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D7503A6867 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 09:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hop04-l1d11-si03.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI03.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.23]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o9BGihvN026124 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:44:43 -0400
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (mailhub.lss.emc.com [10.254.221.251]) by hop04-l1d11-si03.isus.emc.com (RSA Interceptor); Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:44:38 -0400
Received: from corpussmtp5.corp.emc.com (corpussmtp5.corp.emc.com [128.221.166.229]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o9BGiSMa002534; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:44:33 -0400
Received: from CORPUSMX50A.corp.emc.com ([128.221.62.41]) by corpussmtp5.corp.emc.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:44:33 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:44:30 -0400
Message-ID: <BF3BB6D12298F54B89C8DCC1E4073D80027DD7A6@CORPUSMX50A.corp.emc.com>
In-Reply-To: <9af8934019c8f3d84432b005ce087796.squirrel@webmail.eisler.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [nfsv4] Potential schedules for BakeAThons in 2011
Thread-Index: ActpTbgdMybNkf5mQeuBgBLbqMblqgAEk0EQ
References: <9C0FE01C-2ECC-468D-AC32-524191536058@netapp.com><4CB30E70.3080200@RedHat.com> <9af8934019c8f3d84432b005ce087796.squirrel@webmail.eisler.com>
From: <david.noveck@emc.com>
To: <mre-ietf@eisler.com>, <nfsv4@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Oct 2010 16:44:33.0173 (UTC) FILETIME=[94F19450:01CB6963]
X-EMM-MHVC: 1
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 16:43:38 -0000

> 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.

So if a Paris Bakeathon were scheduled for the same time as IETF80,
people who had major interest in the Bakeathon could go to Prague for
the one day on which the nfsv4 working group was held and most Bakeathon
testing activities could be suspended for that time.  People who wanted
to be more involved in general IETF activities could not attend
Bakeathon but I don't know of anyone who would find that troubling.  If
you are one, speak up.

Note that I don't know what the time constraints are on a Paris
Bakeathon and I am not offering any site.  I just want us to be able to
consider non-US sites, without waiting years for an IETF meeting to be
scheduled.  

I think amortization using two cities a one-hour flight apart is quite
reasonable.  Our respective financial departments are going to give us
trouble no matter what we schedule.  After all, it is their job :-).   

-----Original Message-----
From: nfsv4-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:nfsv4-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Mike Eisler
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 10:06 AM
To: nfsv4@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Potential schedules for BakeAThons in 2011

I get that as a WG in an international standards body with customers and
employees spread across the world that having a testing event outside of
the USA would be good.

However, there are significant costs for doing so, especially if
equipment
heavier than laptops is involved.

I suggest amortizing travel costs to align with an IETF meeting (most of
much are no longer in the USA).
 
 

So unless Oracle wants to host a bake-a-thon in Prague next spring, I
think
we are going to Ann Arbor and Sunnyvale next year.

On Mon, October 11, 2010 6:17 am, Steve Dickson wrote:
> On 10/07/2010 02:06 PM, Thomas Haynes wrote:
>> We've discussed potential venues for having 2 BakeAThons in 2011.
>>
>> The dates would be in the middle of June and the start of October.
>>
>> There are two different proposals:
>>
>> 1)
>>
>> June: EMC, Paris, France
>> Oct: NetApp, Sunnyvale, CA
>>
>> 2)
>>
>> June: CITI, Ann Arbor, MI
>> Oct: NetApp, Sunnyvale, CA
> Having the it at CITI makes it much more feasible... IMHO..
>
> From a strictly Red Hat point of view, its much easier and
> affordable for us to send one person to CITI and have
> two people participating verses sending two people to Paris
> France, along with equipment...
>
>>
>> We are seeing increased demand to host the event in Europe and it
should
>> be feasible to do so once every 2 years. Between 20 - 25% of our
>> participants
>> are based on the other side of the Atlantic. We might also draw in
>> additional
>> testers and we all know once an organization gets a taste of testing,
>> they
>> tend to continue attending.
> So are most of the 20 to 25% based out of Paris? If it was held in
Paris,
> what would be percentage of people travelling out of country? Meaning
> would
> only 75 to 80% would have to travelling out of country or would that
> percentage go up to 90 to 95%? If its the latter I see no reason
> to move it...
>
> My two cents...
>
> steved.
> _______________________________________________
> nfsv4 mailing list
> nfsv4@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4
>


-- 
Mike Eisler, Senior Technical Director, NetApp, 719 599 9026,
http://blogs.netapp.com/eislers_nfs_blog/



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