IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: WG Conflict Clarity

Wes Hardaker <hardaker@isi.edu> Sat, 29 June 2019 03:49 UTC

Return-Path: <hardaker@isi.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 B3F291209C6 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 20:49:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.888
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.888 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=isi-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 vh0i8NTWGulN for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 20:48:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x130.google.com (mail-lf1-x130.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3311312009C for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 20:48:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id u10so5174227lfm.12 for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 20:48:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isi-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1TkJbrIy1wvQIuVxwiEZAyGJ1iPodhG1oOWxF8COPXw=; b=wRK+w54byibH17fNBKmJ93CzxtRpN8PNhxha1YJwOWOVwEBuIhvL2U32lLUSIk6+fG 7gJAaiRPDBMU8LkOt9bwrpicSZaaXZ/2w/4vFgzBMYi9epTX0sj+6I+7ItwQ+gAESQJD xqc/f8PYJ9JvYricJTXKJDCYAnFuYQbaPz6/IGSYBxgv1hfZMmKC0E5GCz7/yPRHUtfB VqAvH0mNddn4a1vjWqv+H7oT8UdHcyIem55cHCp0SvOGc1BLgHA8M2MMrujEQ4JTmCfh I+sI3lTW1OV+E3d+ROoPRVjadGQi3eBxa3oFTci7uP6eWtRRzC82hi4vZ6gWp5x7S4gT JAbQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1TkJbrIy1wvQIuVxwiEZAyGJ1iPodhG1oOWxF8COPXw=; b=W85a5dYnum1VD9c7A9ZTqeDgqE0uhvEGHfQDly3AGWf2IG0WHkuaAVmMl17MgsH7oW xlcSs4SSoEP/VFeN6egH19rwRVDu4qT6dULzfSDSt7izbeKLrhok4n4JrYFYRw+BpgbE DOtg6HP611b4JlU/XqxzG8iVgv0Bor2Ip0nbW+HG9jWA14HYhekdCPrkBy9MSX0TmbB3 CdCQsNs6K7HmgGrR1b9nYP1veh+Yu7SX/+LV0BzyBq0NuUdawGchVRKmLA2PqK84JBTd GycGPVbDzASDhcTr+DTw6tILqvYCbShBbVn931swzuJoasjV15BVue6D3nXkVteAIFKf c8pg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWxKwvsSeX5Rx6KvbrAvtGv9JzOW1G3qkoPF7x+t1Eq07jNij2B 50OQL8FtgV5RYUQNTKVNPaTcmVbwrJJ/tUiwl6RPRQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy8Lr4bWPKlZS7hl2fHqBohX44QLYt8opZxHxCpsU4IbguSz7CWZ+N81oR004g3KDlMu2kyPihEI1HyMn0S8Ps=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:750b:: with SMTP id y11mr6577832lfe.16.1561780137361; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 20:48:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMMESsyxUbrVnV71wO-+-R-xNsPagdZStouWG9UsjBamz_0yOQ@mail.gmail.com> <CE6758DF-812F-4BB1-BDB5-3395AED5DA74@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CE6758DF-812F-4BB1-BDB5-3395AED5DA74@gmail.com>
From: Wes Hardaker <hardaker@isi.edu>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 20:48:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CANk3-NDmx07nK6th6=sxKnb6Md8qyPXAa==HrtcYh0NBZqiZ+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: WG Conflict Clarity
To: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>, IETF WG Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004e1bc6058c6e4626"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/kEJr2iem2BMnpo7zNwDvGjScc5U>
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, 29 Jun 2019 03:49:05 -0000

I like the idea, but I would think implementation of the Key Participant
Conflict list would be hard for chairs to fill.  Fred said:

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 7:52 AM Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> Makes sense to me, and confirms the ways I have been using the field - if
> some has an active role in my meeting (presenter, chair, etc), then I have
> listed their other working groups as conflicts. This will just make that
> more explicit.
>

I've never, in many years of presenting at IETFs, had a chair ask me what
other groups I'm active in.  And trust me, they likely couldn't have
guessed the full list easily as I've dabbled in lots of areas and their
view of me has likely been associated with a single sub-area.  I would
suggest that chairs be encouraged to make sure and ask likely speakers for
such a list?

[this could easily snow-ball to having even more documented conflicts to
deal with, unfortunately; IE, I have concerns that it will not make session
planning actually easier, but rather could make it harder]

-- 
Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email