Re: [rtcweb] Agenda for RTCWeb Interim May 19-20, 2014

[Ted Hardie <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 8:03 AM, Mary Barnes <[e-mail]>wrote:

> It certainly would have been nice to know when the meeting was being
> organized that there were no plans for remote participation nor recording.
> That might have impacted people's decisions to not travel to the meeting.
>  At this stage, it's way too late to book travel - airfare is $1000-1300 RT
> from DFW to DCA.
>
>
​Hi Mary,

We will have some remote participation mechanism, but we're still trying to
work out which one will best serve.   Since none of the hosts are actually
local to the venue, that's non trivial.  ​But at this point you can assume
it is one of Hangouts, the Jitsi trial service, or Webex.  If you have a
setup that can handle each of those, then you should be fine.

​Recording is a bit different, but I will continue to talk to the venue
folks about that.

Ted​


I fully understand the logistical issues and it is a hassle to go to
> meeting locations early and spend 1/2-1 day setting up a room with A/V guys
> to ensure that you can get a reasonable experience for remote participants.
>  I personally think it's manageable for chairs if you can get an extra
> microphone and ensure people speak into the microphone.  I would imagine
> it's not possible to have a meeting with 50 people without a microphone in
> the room.
>
>




> So, I guess, I may have gained 3 extra days in my schedule and I would
> hope in this situation that there are meticulous notes with regards to
> consensus points, issue resolution, action items, etc.  And, of course,
> there should be an understanding that while consensus may have been
> obtained in the meeting room, it's not reasonable to expect that no one
> else has input on the topic.
>
> Thanks,
> Mary.
>
>
> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Cullen Jennings <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>
>> Mary, I really did not meet to create a storm on this.
>>
>> I’m glad to do whatever we can but as you know, when we have a room with
>> 50 people in it, the problems is microphones, speakers, and echo
>> cancelation. I don’t know what we will have in the way of mics, a floor
>> setup that lets people move to mics, or ECan that can deal with a room both
>> that large.
>>
>> I have attended two IETF remotely and the experience was pretty awful on
>> both and that was in a dedicated location set up in advance with an AV
>> support team. I think everyone that has ever remote attended an IETF
>> meeting has seen that being remote, even when set up in the best of all
>> possible ways, is much worse than being there.  If you’ve got any
>> preference on what you want us to use - I’m sure we can get whatever of the
>> major systems you want and 800 numbers and such on webex. I’m sure we can
>> have webex or hangouts if that is the preference. But I can’t promise that
>> remote people will hear everything and I can more or less promises that I
>> have never seen a set up where lots of remote people speaking worked out
>> well.
>>
>>
>> On May 8, 2014, at 1:13 PM, Mary Barnes <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Honestly, I find this extremely disappointing. In the end, if your
>> audio isn't good, then the meeting is not accessible to the community
>> (myself included) that might not happen the $s to travel for the meeting.
>>  When we had CLUE WG interim meetings, we worked very hard to ensure we had
>> quality audio for the recording and any remote participants.  My
>> understanding is that this the usual expectation for official IETF WG
>> meetings.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Mary.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Cullen Jennings <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> >
>> > As long as the room supports it, I imagine we will have a live stream
>> from either WebEX or Hangouts - not sure which yet.  For remote feedback
>> back to the room there will be the usual xmpp for RTCWeb and IRC for
>> WebRTC. I don’t know what the situation is in the room for mic’s etc but we
>> will have remote access as best we can.
>> >
>> >
>> > On May 8, 2014, at 10:02 AM, Mary Barnes <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Is there remote participation information available?  I could not
>> find anything in my email archives nor on the mailing list.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Mary.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Cullen Jennings <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Below is a the current agenda for the upcoming RTCWEB Interim
>> (essentially, we have the morning sessions for the three days May 19, May
>> 20, May 21 2014).  If you have not filled in your participation in the
>> doodle poll, please do so at: http://doodle.com/qewq4xvszbc6d4sn. That
>> helps us plan space and food as well as have badges ready.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks
>> > >
>> > > Ted, Sean, Cullen
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Interim Meeting RTCWEB May 2014
>> > > http://doodle.com/qewq4xvszbc6d4sn
>> > >
>> > > Day 1
>> > >
>> > > Admin Trivia (15m) - Chairs
>> > >
>> > > RTP + Media  (75m) Magnus Westerlund and Harald Alvestrand
>> > > draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-13
>> > > draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-05
>> > > draft-ietf-rtcweb-transports-03
>> > >
>> > > JSEP (2.5h) Eric Rescorla
>> > > draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-06
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Day 2
>> > >
>> > > Data Channel (4h) Randell Jesup
>> > > draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-08
>> > > draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-protocol-04
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Day 3
>> > >
>> > > Security ( 2h ) Eric Rescorla
>> > > draft-ietf-rtcweb-security-06
>> > > draft-ietf-rtcweb-security-arch-09
>> > >
>> > > ALPN ( 15m ) Martin Thomson
>> > > draft-thomson-rtcweb-alpn-00
>> > >
>> > > Consent Freshness ( 30m) Martin Thomson
>> > >
>> > > draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-02
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Matters arising from webrtc meetings ( remaining time)
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > rtcweb mailing list
>> > > [e-mail]
>> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>