Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Feedback from IETF 120 Vancouver post-meeting survey

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 03 September 2024 18:55 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DF65C151091 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2024 11:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dcH_oEj77tLa for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2024 11:54:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1810CC14F6A3 for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Sep 2024 11:54:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCFA53898F; Tue, 3 Sep 2024 14:54:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with LMTP id 4wi8LIBAI_ax; Tue, 3 Sep 2024 14:54:53 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1725389693; bh=vTVoOaBmcqQkbqVJyJnAQe8iWxwltpghNnH3pd7hEQw=; h=From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=OJZ0kWuQEaOnM518LD2gPXoalEGA6c2+/ACdpyRlS1vG6XgOBMkKBMnRbl8jN0K1E b9cIvgHdi+RXTBTdQ183WU6BlsTUprZ3NSffBOQs1ROO99FmMIUJ6q59rKohn/Ufcg JQD83CNCXZk/Z2+dCDZFd8qUU5fWV7vgQNuZZc6Ggn18udj5bMZDpXsJAMPrxPJMeF IxG2IOjbF5YmcMQm/A7SLqreAYCOnyqXs1GhYzgoSSsTiK8HOl2Oq4hXEK0JNM95E0 hXvXNZUFmVYyJyUuL6ZYjEBb8kWL8Kwn78vZ5HARGrG0TSJ4DAtnjfNv55K+JYod1N HiHfOWm9r4FbA==
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 142E03898C; Tue, 3 Sep 2024 14:54:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F971435; Tue, 3 Sep 2024 14:54:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "Deen, Glenn (Comcast Cable)" <Glenn.Deen@nbcuni.com>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Feedback from IETF 120 Vancouver post-meeting survey
In-Reply-To: <DM4PR14MB5056192289F4E3649421BBCBE2932@DM4PR14MB5056.namprd14.prod.outlook.com>
References: <7487E6AA-A8BE-42A9-9E80-F85C49ABF026@ietf.org> <CAHbuEH72xCnM6_F+A+jP3nPkNY2sHa_zG4Skbhdu40SBgXSdcA@mail.gmail.com> <cf22ba70-330a-a912-f838-3010fa423f6e@nohats.ca> <dc4b8bba-7f4d-47a1-9376-bf91a9f03b64@lear.ch> <75730386-05fc-4e71-abed-1d4a6c33b4c2@bogus.com> <91b0663e-fa4e-4b26-bd67-94ff5848b39e@lear.ch> <m2ikvdjk43.fsf@owl-home.int.chopps.org> <eb45bf94-8d26-4593-af8f-fa9a83282677@lear.ch> <yblwmjsopcv.fsf@wd.hardakers.net> <4FD7F5F6-8E20-4A56-869E-C0340352874F@gmail.com> <DM4PR14MB5056192289F4E3649421BBCBE2932@DM4PR14MB5056.namprd14.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.8+dev; GNU Emacs 28.2
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0;<'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2024 14:54:53 -0400
Message-ID: <4094.1725389693@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Message-ID-Hash: 6ENAYJTWIOQD6NBD6DAX4VE73VGIER5X
X-Message-ID-Hash: 6ENAYJTWIOQD6NBD6DAX4VE73VGIER5X
X-MailFrom: mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-wgchairs.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: "wgchairs@ietf.org" <wgchairs@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/8L28m3s-gPURzfyd6x49U1yuvtQ>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:wgchairs-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:wgchairs-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:wgchairs-leave@ietf.org>

Deen, Glenn (Comcast Cable) <Glenn.Deen@nbcuni.com> wrote:
    > Instead of a warning about the plan to close the queue, some chairs say
    > without warning “this topic seems to be getting a lot of discussion;
    > the queue has been closed and you’ll have to take it to the list”.

    > A better practice is to announce, “the queue is going to stop accepting
    > new joiners in X minutes, so jump in now if you want to comment.”

A corollorary is that it's okay to end the meeting 68 minutes into your 90
minute slot, because you:
a) left enough spare time for discussion, but didn't use it all.
b) didn't overpack the agenda.

And it's okay to ask for a 90 minute slot next time.

(Again: I'd like us to schedule such that everyone gets a de-conflicted 60
minute slot early in the week, and one or two additional 60 minute slots
later in the week.  This allows the WG to come back to have longer discussions)

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide