IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IAB] Change in Sunday Newcomer Activities for IETF 105

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 06 May 2019 18:09 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 4B9D7120049 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 May 2019 11:09:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 CG4z01KRswf8 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 May 2019 11:09:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73EF4120047 for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 May 2019 11:09:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2:56b2:3ff:fe0b:d84]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 379943826C; Mon, 6 May 2019 14:09:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 14365B1C; Mon, 6 May 2019 14:09:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11B40A8A; Mon, 6 May 2019 14:09:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "wgchairs@ietf.org" <wgchairs@ietf.org>, Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
Subject: Re: [IAB] Change in Sunday Newcomer Activities for IETF 105
In-Reply-To: <ybllfzjxzup.fsf@w7.hardakers.net>
References: <FFCF22D3-9D23-4B4F-A9B3-F8AA22A09CC0@isoc.org> <56EE9746-6023-4458-B7C2-0C7B4D879BD7@gmail.com> <ybllfzjxzup.fsf@w7.hardakers.net>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
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-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 06 May 2019 14:09:39 -0400
Message-ID: <26236.1557166179@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/Pcdgj3lxVqgkJaTYEveqqSZxKNg>
X-BeenThere: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs/>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 May 2019 18:09:43 -0000

Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net> wrote:
    > Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> writes:

    >> Whilst that was not its intended purpose, as a venue for the chairs
    >> and ADs to find each other before the meeting started and sync up on
    >> matters that need to be resolved ahead of the other sessions it was
    >> very useful in making the main business of the IETF meeting more
    >> successful.

    > I think that's a very valid point (along with the dialog that followed,
    > which was all valid as well), and confirms exactly what the problem was:
    > it was advertised as a session to help newcomers but wasn't looked at
    > that way by most senior IETF folks actually going to it.  It sounds like
    > people would actually rather not have the newcomers participate in it at
    > all but instead having a leadership gathering, which is far outside the
    > scope of the EDU team and it's purpose certainly.  And begins to look
    > exclusionary too, if you stare at it long enough.

Yes, it definitely does.

    > Side question: if you need (quiet) time to catch up with
    > chairs/ADs/whatever, why can't you schedule that time instead regardless
    > of whether there is a restricted-access social or not?  If there was a
    > blank hour in the Sunday agenda why wouldn't that work just as well?

It would not work as well because it requires that chairs know they need to
meet.   A typical case would be a chair chats with with an AD, the AD says,
"well, that needs cross-area review from XYZ WG" ... and then they go to find
WG chair from XYZ.  It works because everyone is more or less in the same
spot, is relatively idle (no laptops out), due to the abundance of beer.

    > [the obvious answer to me is that if everyone is in the same room, it
    > makes bouncing between people better but adds the risk that you still
    > won't talk to everyone you wanted to because it wasn't a scheduled meet-up]

It's not the efficiency of finding people, but the immediacy of the
contact...


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email