Re: [Pesci-discuss] Face-to-face meetings (was: Re: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria)

["Marshall Eubanks" <[e-mail]>]

Hello;

On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 18:43:59 -0400
 Scott W Brim <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 08:30:03AM +1000, Geoff Huston allegedly wrote:
> > It does make one wonder, as Spencer already has, what the real role and 
> > value is of the face-to-face meetings. I suspect that the role of the IETF 
> > meetings from the perspective of a WG is becoming more of "reporting  to a 
> > broader audience"  rather than "working in a broader context". 
> 
> My theory up to now was that most of the work is and should be done
> outside of the big meetings.  The big meetings are for reaching
> agreemetns (and as you say, cross-fertilization).  However, it may be

IMHO the primary reason people attend any meeting like the IETF is to meet people
and have conversations in the corridors or at lunch or the bar or ... 

People always laugh when I say that, but it is true; everything else
can be done by remotely. That is why
any attempts to use break times for other  purposes (like shuttling between two
different meetings, or between meetings in widely separated buildings) should be resisted.

> that the issues many WGs are dealing with are simply too big to get
> resolution in 2 meeting slots, and too deep to get resolution by email
> or by design teams.  How can we have the focus of the interims and
> still have the cross-fertilization?
> 

Here is an idea :

Allow for WG working lunches or other  special sessions. By a special session I mean

-  someone (presumably the WG chair  or a delegate or maybe an AD) picks a 
topic that needs to be resolved, appoints someone or several someones to give a review of the
situation, and gives time to the proponents of the solution (or active opponents), and then allows
time for discussion. I have seen this done before and it works, but it takes time and planning.

The focus should be "we are going to come to consensus in this meeting on  a solution that we can
then present to the list."

Note that if you  really want cross-fertilization then IMHO you will have to give time for review of
the situation. You cannot expect people in other areas to get up to speed on something without some
assistance.

To me, this ties into IETF attendance : how do we get and keep people to come ? One reason to come 
(besides meeting people) is to learn about new areas, or to learn more about areas you are
peripherally involved in. The more review that is provided 
(in many WG meetings, there  is none), the
more reason people have to come.

Of course,  with the new IETF-Paris scheduling, the IETF could have after-dinnner tutorials for an
extra fee, and both raise some  money and educate people.

Regards
Marshall Eubanks


> _______________________________________________
> Pesci-discuss mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss


_______________________________________________
Pesci-discuss mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss