Re: IETF 109 Preliminary Agenda

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Sat, 17 October 2020 19:36 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
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 082523A09EE for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 12:36:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iaOzMzqJrMhH for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 12:36:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94DFB3A09EC for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 12:36:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kduck.mit.edu ([24.16.140.251]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 09HJaBqs000413 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 17 Oct 2020 15:36:15 -0400
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 12:36:10 -0700
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>
Cc: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: IETF 109 Preliminary Agenda
Message-ID: <20201017193610.GA39170@kduck.mit.edu>
References: <160288855079.14008.13967692974159638979@ietfa.amsl.com> <30344.1602894208@localhost> <FD995870-E9C6-4099-93AF-253F0A11F56B@tzi.org> <CADaq8jcKK5kUvU3v7+6gEaeqjqxtw-Bii5is_hoq1ugogCoWPg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CADaq8jcKK5kUvU3v7+6gEaeqjqxtw-Bii5is_hoq1ugogCoWPg@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/j_TvpkNw-qMvSUdBio2LPOBDnHc>
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: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 19:36:23 -0000

On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 07:33:09AM -0400, David Noveck wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 8:34 PM Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> 
> > On 2020-10-17, at 02:23, Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > 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.
> >
> > I don’t think you are aware when Spanish people tend to get up :-)
> >
> 
> Fair enough but I don't know when people in Bangkok typically get up and
> I'm not sure it is really relevant.  Typically on-site meetings start at
> 10am local time and go on to 5:30, creating a 7.5-hour window for meeting
> sessions.
> 
> Given that this is a virtual meeting,  it would make sense to widen those
> windows to allow some amelioration of the problems that this creates for
> some time zones, in this case, for those in the Americas.  Instead, the
> window has been shortened to six hours and I'm not sure why.

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.

Thanks,

Ben