RE: Draft "Convince your boss" note for IETF participants - follow up

Xipengxiao <> Wed, 05 October 2022 08:17 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88841C1524C0 for <>; Wed, 5 Oct 2022 01:17:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.908
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2Uqtoy8AstSo for <>; Wed, 5 Oct 2022 01:17:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3DD7C1524C8 for <>; Wed, 5 Oct 2022 01:17:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown []) by (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Mj6p62ZNSz67yJQ; Wed, 5 Oct 2022 16:15:42 +0800 (CST)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.31; Wed, 5 Oct 2022 10:17:06 +0200
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.01.2375.031; Wed, 5 Oct 2022 10:17:06 +0200
From: Xipengxiao <>
To: "" <>, Greg Wood <>
CC: WG Chairs <>
Subject: RE: Draft "Convince your boss" note for IETF participants - follow up
Thread-Topic: Draft "Convince your boss" note for IETF participants - follow up
Thread-Index: AQHY2EJMetE2z4KxTEOFu9p/RCAc2a3+v+4AgACtUBA=
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2022 08:17:05 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2022 08:17:11 -0000

Hi Greg and folks,

I read the letter.  It doesn't feel like a message "to my boss" (a person that I know well), more like a message "to company management" (people that I don't know well).  If I have to write a message to convince my boss to let me go to London or Yokohama, I will write something like this:

1. My draft is at a crucial point.  Presenting it on site will allow me to see how the chairs and other people react.  This is useful to decide the next steps.  

2. Attending on site will allow f2f discussions with some key people. Only through this can I know their true opinion about the draft (and build/enhance relationship with them).  Standardization has a personal aspect in addition to the technical aspect. Remote attendance miss the personal aspect.

3. If there is budget concern, I will not request to attend every IETF meeting in person, but only those when the draft is at a crucial point.  

Hope this helps.


-----Original Message-----
From: WGChairs <> On Behalf Of
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2022 1:28 AM
To: Greg Wood <>
Cc: WG Chairs <>
Subject: Re: Draft "Convince your boss" note for IETF participants - follow up

	If we’re really going to do this, it might be nice to have some indicators of success, if we could be convinced to measure them. How often does this letter actually work? If it did, what about it resonated with their boss? If it didn’t work, why not? What were the questions they wanted answered but weren’t covered, or what didn’t resonate? In the past, when I’ve had to convince start ups to fund my trips, I typically was asked 1. How much will it cost (or they tell me here’s the budget, make it work), 2. How much time will it take that week/will you be doing IETF things vs how much time will be spent performing your day job (APAC trips are brutal :)) and 3. What do I get out of it? I realize this might not have been the initial point of the “convince your boss” thread, but I didn’t see a lot of Venn diagram overlap, so thought I’d share.


> On Oct 4, 2022, at 3:39 PM, Greg Wood <> wrote:
> Hi,
> Thanks for all the feedback and really good discussion! I do want to note that this text is intended to be a starting point for adaption to a person’s particular situation so not expected to cover all cases. Hopefully it provides enough scaffolding to make it easier for those who are looking to build their own cases.
> I’ve updated the template note based on the input with details below:
> I’d be particularly interested from anyone who shares this with participants in their groups (perhaps folks who would like to come but don’t yet have support from their orgs) and, if so, I’d love to know whether they find it useful. 
> Feel free to (have them) email directly with information about that.
> Again, this is an experiment and it seems like there is interest, so developing other versions of this is definitely something we could work on.
> -Greg
> +++
> Feedback on “Convince your boss”
> ===
> Here is what I heard and tried to incorporate it (please let me know if I’ve missed something):
> a) Provide more direct examples of how in-person interaction at the meeting would be useful
> I’ve added some example text and also explanatory notes about how to use/augment it
> b) include the case where the company is leading in a particular area
> Included an option for someone authoring an I-D (though this may not fully cover the point)
> c) Consider other modes of participation in addition to in-person participation at a meeting, particularly with in-person participation more difficult to get approved.
> This note is intentionally tailored to in-person participation, but parallel notes for modes like online meetings and general IETF participation could be also developed. Since the question was raised, I do want to note that the general motivation for this effort is to promote IETF participation *generally* (mailing list contributions, etc.) so that is definitely something I’d like follow up on.
> d) Convince the lawyers!
> This is very an interesting point that I am not familiar enough with to suggest text. I am following up directly.
> e) Will this lead to sales?
> In general, this doesn’t seem to be a case that can/should be made directly for attending an IETF meeting.
> f) provide examples of post-meeting reports
> This seems like something that is generally company-specific in format and person-specific in terms of content, but if folks have previous (perhaps redacted) examples they could share as part of a library, that would be a great starting point.
>> On 28, Sep2022, at 10:22, Greg Wood <> wrote:
>> Hello!
>> As an experiment, based on material some other technology conferences provide to (potential) participants, and at the suggestion received from an IETFer, we’ve created a draft “Convince Your Boss” note that might be used by someone seeking approval to attend an IETF meeting in-person:
>> Any and all comments about whether this might be useful to you or participants in your groups, or suggestions about how it might be tuned to be more useful, would be most welcome — either on this list or directly to me.
>> More broadly, it would be useful to know whether there is any specific information or material that would make it easier for IETF participants to participate in the IETF—not just meetings, but also (for example) devoting time to work in the IETF. Again, I’m happy to receive suggestions directly or on the list.
>> Please let me know if I can provide more information or answer any questions.
>> Thank you,
>> -Greg
>> --
>> Greg Wood
>> +1-703-625-3917