Re: [Rfced-future] RSWG meetings and IETF meetings (Re: Issue 144)

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

--On Thursday, January 6, 2022 11:53 +0900 "Martin J. Dürst"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> So far, this discussion seems to be going in the right
> direction.
> 
> However, I think it's unrealistic to imagine in-person RSWG
> meetings independent of IETF meetings; the travel costs would
> just not make sense. I think we should say so explicitly. That
> would also raise the question of funding, but we could
> probably assume that all the participants in the RSWG would
> attend some other WG or RG anyway.

Martin,

Yes, but...

If we are going to go in this direction and spell that out, we
also need to be clear that RSWG f2f meetings, with IETF or not,
must have provision for effective offsite/online participation.
In addition to all the usual reasons (with or without the
pandemic), we want to be very sure that we don't exclude the
non-IETF users/ customers for the RFC Series from the RSWG.
While my expectations that many (or even a few) of them will
actively participate are very low, doing anything that blocks
their participation would be really bad news.

best,
    john