Re: [tcmtf] Other questions necessary for the BOF proposal

[Martin Stiemerling <[e-mail]>]

On 05/27/2013 12:32 PM, Jose Saldana wrote:
> In addition,
> http://www.ietf.org/old/2009/instructions/MTG-SLOTS.htmlsays that we
>  have to include:
>
> b. AREA under which Working Group or BOF appears: Transport Area
>
> c. CONFLICTS you wish to avoid, please be as specific as possible:
> Transport Area meetings, RAI, LISP
>
> d. Expected Attendance (figures from the previous IETF meeting are
> included in
>
> the message that is sent when scheduling opens):
>
> e. Special requests:
>
> f. Number of sessions: 1
>
> g. Length of sessions: I think 1 hour should be enough

Probably 1.5 hours is better, given your planned schedule.

>
> Any other ideas for c)?

All Transport Area WGs sounds like a good idea. It would be good to 
double check what WGs out of RAI should be on the conflict list.

>
> For d), I don’t really know. It depends on the interest we are able
> to achieve previously. In the mailing list there are 33 people, but I
> have received e-mails from many other people. Any ideas?

I will put in 100 to be on the safe side.

   Martin

>
> Thanks!
>
> Jose
>

-- 
[e-mail]

NEC Laboratories Europe
NEC Europe Limited
Registered Office:
Athene, Odyssey Business Park, West End  Road, London, HA4 6QE, GB
Registered in England 2832014