Re: [rtcweb] Update of future interim meeting locations

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 5:15 PM, James M. Polk <[e-mail]> wrote:
> At 04:09 PM 4/17/2012, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Marshall Eubanks
>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Cullen Jennings <[e-mail]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> First of all, the chairs would are going to declare that there is WG
>> >>> consensus for a 1:1:1 meeting rotation between west coast of north
>> >>> america, europe, and east coast of north america and plan to run
>> >>> approximately equal number of meetings in these locations.  In
>> >>> counting the number of past meetings in a given region, we will
>> >>> include all the face to face RTCWeb and WebRTC meetings as this work
>> >>> is closely joined and a large number of the participants travel to
>> >>> both sets of meetings. The face to face meetings that happen at the
>> >>> main IETF or W3C meetings are included in this count. Collocated
>> >>> meetings will be counted just once as they only require one set of
>> >>> travel to that location.
>> >>
>> >> Cullen,
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for this clarification. Just to be totally sure I understand,
>> >> do you mean the following algorithm?
>> >>
>> >>   For an interim meeting at time X, sum up all the prior meetings
>> >>   for each of the regions. The region with the fewest prior
>> >>   meetings is then selected for the next interim. [0]
>> >>
>> >
>> > Which implies that  Paris doesn't count.
>>
>> That's certainly not what I meant. Perhaps it would help to rewrite
>> "next interim" as "interim X". Concretely, to select an interim meeting
>> in mid-September, I would expect to count meetings up to and
>> including Vancouver.
>
>
> why don't Paris and Boston (I think that was the last interim, though that
> might have been CLUE) count here?

They would. That's why I said "Up to and including". Paris was before
September 2012.

Obviously I'm being unclear. Here's a slightly more formal description.

Each scheduled or past meeting is represented as a tuple [region, date].
E.g., Paris would be something like [Europe, 20120325]

To select an interim at date X, take the subset of all meetings with date < X
and count the number in each region. To just make up some data, this
would look like:

{
  'Europe':1,
  'West Coast':2:,
  'East Coast':0
}

Then, select the region with the smallest number of meetings for the
interim at date X.
So, in this case, the interim would be held on the East Coast.

For additional concretenss, iff we were executing this algorithm to select this
interim, we would be building a table of all meetings up through Paris. I.e.,
the last two would be IETF 83 and the Jan/Feb Interim in Mountain View.
[I'm assuming for the purposes of this discussion that we are not counting
CLUE interims, since the chairs referred to "RTCWeb and WebRTC".

One detail: you need to select the interims in chronological order because the
previous interim selections obviously affect the next ones.

Best,
-Ekr