Re: [vmeet] what's been working/failed/tried in hubs?

[Vinayak Hegde <[e-mail]>]

Replies inline.

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 6:45 PM, Alia Atlas <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Christian, Dhruv, Vinayak, & all,
>
> Interesting.  In Boston, we have tried doing some remote hubs during the
> last 2 IETFs.  This has been primarily routing related WGs and hosted at
> Juniper in Westford.   While they're public, I think most of the attendance
> has been from Juniper folks, because they are there, hear about it more
> easily, and are more interested.
>
> In addition, we've had a couple get-togethers in Cambridge - one to
> celebrate Scott Bradner's retirement and another social lunch.   We're
> trying to pull together a meet-up with a few short technical presentations
> and then potentially dinner afterwards.
>

We have had a couple of themed get-togethers on IoT. There have also been a
few presentations by active IETFers in a few relevant networking
conferences. We are trying to add more structure and make it easier to
voulnteer and have more meetups.


> In this area, we have a good number of experienced IETFers but reaching
> out to pull new people in is more challenging.  It's also not completely
> clear what will excite others enough to come to an event.  The social lunch
> did have lively discussion, including of course IETF tech topics.
>
> I'm thinking that focusing on remote hubs during IETF isn't as useful for
> us, because a lot of the active folks are at IETF and the time-zone
> differences are hard.
>

I think the remote hubs which work best when there is a time difference of
less than 4 hours (like Berlin). European IETFs work best for remote hubs
(As they coincide with work or after-work hours).


> I'm also wondering about identifying/asking for community organizers to
> focus on planning a few events (1 or 2 between IETFs) and think about how
> to get the word out.
>
> It sounds like this is a different approach, though very similar in some
> ways of trying to add talks and interaction.
>

LACNIC has been doing regular webinar to raise awareness. That is something
we want to emulate in our region.


> Thoughts?
> Alia
>
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Christian O'Flaherty <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Alia,
>>
>> There’s a draft that will be updated soon with some experiences and
>> recommendations.
>>
>> Some comments inline:
>>
>> > I am curious about how the various IETF Hubs have been doing?
>> > What activities have you tried and found useful/successful/interesting?
>>
>> Hubs in Latin America have been diverse:
>>         Some hubs were just a small gathering for remote WG session
>> participation only.
>>         Some hubs were meetings with an introduction/presentation and
>> then the WG session (sometimes with local explanations and discussions in
>> parallel)
>>         Some had a previous introduction webinar to prepare participants
>>         Some hubs were organized for IETF promotion and the WG session
>> itself was less important (more local activities)
>>         Sometimes (in Brazil) they were organized as remote "IETF
>> meetings” were the students had a WG to attend in each slot.
>>         Some hubs were co-located with other events (academia) were a
>> meeting room had the remote WG session
>>
>> > What did you try that failed miserably?
>>
>> In some cases the hubs had as few as three or four participants… but I
>> would not consider it a failure.
>> There were hubs that failed because remote participation was impossible
>> (low quality) and they did something else.
>>
>> > Do you have a community organizer (or group of folks) pushing the
>> organization
>> > of the activities and facilitating?
>>
>> Yes… there’s always an organizer / facilitator
>>
>> >   Do you have different people stepping up to pull things together?
>>
>> Yes… I’m including Juliao Braga from Brasil who is the main one in our
>> region.
>>
>> >
>> > What is your participation like?  Is it largely experienced IETFers?
>> researchers & students? interested developers?
>>
>> We’ve been using them for IETF engagement so they’re usually not
>> experienced IETFers, mostly students and professors, some network
>> operators. I’m not aware of developers but some students can count as such.
>>
>> >
>> > Personally, I'm brainstorming a bit about what might be useful to try
>> in the Boston Hub and how much to push or encourage structure.  It feels
>> like some can be quite useful.
>>
>> Please don’t consider our experiences as “best practice”. We do have
>> completely different needs and objectives for remote hubs in our region.
>>
>> Christian
>>
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Alia
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
>> > http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html.
>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vmeet
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html.
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vmeet
>
>