Re: IETF109 starts at noon (local time)

Carsten Bormann <> Sun, 18 October 2020 01:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3AD23A0A68; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 18:12:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.003
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZD-9WC7ihRkt; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 18:12:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 105613A0A2C; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 18:12:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CDMLd4cTZzybL; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 03:12:25 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.\))
Subject: Re: IETF109 starts at noon (local time)
From: Carsten Bormann <>
In-Reply-To: <12526.1602980594@localhost>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 03:12:24 +0200
Cc:, Working Group Chairs <>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 624676344.02546-065442182665df32396876483ed61168
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <30344.1602894208@localhost> <> <> <> <12526.1602980594@localhost>
To: Michael Richardson <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 01:12:32 -0000

On 2020-10-18, at 02:23, Michael Richardson <> wrote:
> please take followups to manycouches@ only.

(This doesn’t work, so I won’t try.)

> On 2020-10-17, at 02:23, Michael Richardson <> wrote to wgchairs:
>> It appears that session are scheduled starting at 05:00 UTC, which would be
>> 12:00(noon) Bangkok time.   It's really as if this meeting was being
>> held in Madrid.
> Benjamin Kaduk <> wrote:
>> Could you expound a bit on why you think widening the block of time in
>> which sessions occur would be helpful?  IIRC we have survey results showing
>> that in a virtual format even the 7.5-hour window is too long to be
>> practical, and having a longer window is going to push more of the session
>> timeslots into times that are quite painful for more participant timezones.
>> My understanding was that the idea of having a consolidated virtual IETF
>> was to enable the cross-polination that occurs at in-person IETF meetings
>> where most participants are attending sessions in most of the timeslots.
> First, I would like to know why we can do 9hr long days in person,  while we
> can't even manage 7.5 hour virtual days.  

It is called Zoom fatigue.  It is very real.

A lot of thinking went into the new schedule, and the 2+0.5+1+0.5+2 structure sounds rather brilliant to me given the IETF108 experience.

> I think that this needs to be
> unpacked a lot more in the survey.
> Second, that doesn't explain why we are starting at the times we starting.

This has not been divulged, but it is just a repeat of IETF 108, with adjustments for the too short slots and too short breaks.

> I don't think it helps people in any of the time zones.

(It sure helps the Europeans.)

> (Starting earlier would probably be kinder to Pacific coast types.
> We start at 9pm Pacific now, end at 3am.
> If we started at "10am" local", then we'd end at 1am, which is just a late
> night for them.

(BTW, it is 03:00 CEST right now here.  Whether that time is a problem for a participant depends a lot on their personal habits.)

> I expect to flip my time zone: it's the full 12 hour flip for me.
> Starting later doesn't help me much.
> {Given my investment of ~36hours to do this, I'd kinda like to maximimze my
> investment.}
> The current schedule has only 30 minute breaks.
> This isn't enough for people where it's "day" to eat and still do any kind of
> cross-polination.

I expect to have some kind of screen breakfast/early lunch.

> For people for whom it's middle of the night,

… and for everyone else…

> I guess we'll have to bring box
> lunches to our desks.


> The bigger point is that 30 minutes is not enough to:
> 1) finish 3 minutes late
> 2) go to the washroom
> 3) connect to to chat with someone
> 4) eat/drink while this occurs

Eat during session then.  (Don’t forget to mute :-)

> 5) arrive 3 minutes early for the next session
> I'm glad that there are 7 tracks rather than 8, though.

(I’m not sure what you are referring to here. 
There are slots with 5, 6, 7, and 8 rooms.)

Grüße, Carsten