Re: [re-ECN] Draft Agenda

[Matt Mathis <[e-mail]>]

I would like to point out  that  "[Need to confirm that the] demo
didn't generate much extra traffic." is just one symptom of the very
problem that we are trying to address....

and represents perhaps the easiest way to win the argument  "Is this
really needed?"  If the Internet had a proper sharing architecture,
such a demo would pose no risk to other users (at least not from
traffic)  --- but then I assume I am preaching to the choir.

Thanks,
--MM--
-------------------------------------------
Matt Mathis      http://staff.psc.edu/mathis
Work:412.268.3319   Home/Cell:412.654.7529
-------------------------------------------
Evil is defined by mortals who think they know
"The Truth" and use force to apply it to others.



On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Woundy, Richard
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> Thanks Lars, I see your point about vendor demos.
>
>>I don't think this applies to demos done in the scope of a WG or BOF
>
> Actually, folks in my group have coordinated several dual stack lite demos at IETF meetings; dual stack lite is being standardized in the Softwires working group. They definitely had to coordinate with the IETF meeting network engineers. That demo didn't generate much extra traffic, but it did require extra devices in the IETF meeting network.
>
> Their concerns would seem to be proportional to the volume of traffic generated and/or the additional complexity in the IETF meeting network.
>
> Again, I will defer to you and the BoF chairs.
>
> -- Rich
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Lars Eggert [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Sun 10/11/2009 5:28 AM
> To: Woundy, Richard
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [re-ECN] Draft Agenda
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I believe this text deals with demos that the organization *hosting*
> an IETF meeting might want to show on-site. For example, if Nokia were
> to host an IETF and we wanted to show some new phones, the secretariat
> - or the IESG? - would need to OK this. We don't want the hosts to do
> too much advertising at the venue.
>
> I don't think this applies to demos done in the scope of a WG or BOF -
> there, it is up to the chairs to decide what is appropriate IMO.
>
> On 2009-10-8, at 22:09, Woundy, Richard wrote:
>> I looked for some additional information about IETF meeting
>> demonstrations, and found this paragraph in "Hosting an IETF
>> Meeting" at
>> http://www.ietf.org/meeting/hosting-an-ietf.html:
>>
>> Demonstrations
>>
>> All on-site demonstrations must be approved by the Secretariat. The
>> determination will be based entirely on the subject matter and its
>> applicability to the IETF. The opinion of the IESG may be solicited as
>> well. Approval must be also given by local host, if, the individual
>> giving the demo asks to use Terminal Room resources (i.e., equipment,
>> power and/or space). The local host may decline to accommodate
>> requests
>> to support demonstrations on-site, especially if there is no physical
>> room, facilities or personnel available to support the effort.
>
> Lars
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> re-ECN mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn
>