[Tools-discuss] The future of "Interim" meetings

Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com> Wed, 15 April 2020 00:44 UTC

Return-Path: <pusateri@bangj.com>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 583F93A139E for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 17:44:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bangj.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BcP-Tx3o3vkf for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 17:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oj.bangj.com (69-77-154-174.static.skybest.com [69.77.154.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 406E23A139B for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 17:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.10.124] (mta-107-13-246-59.nc.rr.com [107.13.246.59]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by oj.bangj.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0FB723D431 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 20:44:09 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=bangj.com; s=201907; t=1586911449; bh=LG3iITeqQYc5BAulzMzPBQVWkItA4VxMYs345oyAyOM=; h=From:Subject:Date:To:From; b=PexChlNcn2E+Tf9CnwVuvR9vuEH3yXls+L9/5iaawrTEmrFzAeKvo3JtqYrJg8AeJ YVdjyEYUVDcT4zcPbr6p3PGTd94YzCtDMQeJL94dqeBjOg7N8vAqopLfKzwO8Z3qWr gVHo8uinr0uMXqQ/2qnESWOWgMvn0eQRI+OYPjTYGliaMrLXSbu5t+zP/TyAepXruW Jf1By+cBYJ1GShepc8CBBzLPNbPgasrV9WGnB6ThIvZ0NdrdwBCeowLaYRQj1Ev+rK Cvr2Ug5l/QFbHC6ARDNJzmUWTDxWYYjMhp6O0dQzFHZq6UUHkQrIEzfr+SiAyrqg5g 5lKEzbTnkPj1Q==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Message-Id: <0486D87E-5655-4535-8D59-4BD56EE628E2@bangj.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 20:44:08 -0400
To: Tools Team Discussion <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (17E262)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/evLKhGi8eHDL57rNhmgeIk0tZpE>
Subject: [Tools-discuss] The future of "Interim" meetings
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 00:44:18 -0000

Not sure if this is the right place but I wonder if creating a "meeting" for each interim session is the best approach in the long term.

tools-arch@ seems more appropriate but since they aren't taking posts from non-members....

I appreciate that in the short term, all of these "interim" sessions by different owners can be best organized into their own meeting.

If there is a plan to rectify this, then I would like to know. If not, I can work around this in presentation but it's a bit of work and I don't want to start if there's another solution on the horizon.

I'm thinking of presenting these sessions in weekly collections and ignoring the current "meeting" classification with one session per meeting. I will create a pseudo meeting for "Week of April 13" and "Week of April 20", etc.

Thanks for any insight,
Tom