Re: IETF 109 Preliminary Agenda

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Mon, 19 October 2020 23:12 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
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 CD38D3A112A for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 16:12:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.251
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.251 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 Fr4PEimviMue for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 16:12:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9701A3A1129 for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 16:12:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.52]) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 166DA548045; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 01:12:29 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id 09668440059; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 01:12:29 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 01:12:29 +0200
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: 'Working Group Chairs' <wgchairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: IETF 109 Preliminary Agenda
Message-ID: <20201019231228.GH24945@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <160288855079.14008.13967692974159638979@ietfa.amsl.com> <30344.1602894208@localhost> <FD995870-E9C6-4099-93AF-253F0A11F56B@tzi.org> <CADaq8jcKK5kUvU3v7+6gEaeqjqxtw-Bii5is_hoq1ugogCoWPg@mail.gmail.com> <20201017193610.GA39170@kduck.mit.edu> <CADaq8je4nFVKkGw3X+Yo53N1xaXrgNRvOw4ZaNA0mT3dsDi-kQ@mail.gmail.com> <31255.1603126883@localhost> <058701d6a648$998eb150$ccac13f0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <058701d6a648$998eb150$ccac13f0$@olddog.co.uk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/pwcs2TWjuPlmr3FT9LSFfuiMAo8>
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, 19 Oct 2020 23:12:37 -0000

+1

regurgitating my suggestion from 108: Put more time in between the virtual meeting
slots, allowing attendees to engage in this valuable "between sessions" discussions
(hang out after session in meeting, lunch get-together, calorie-free-cookie-break..).

Especially for the Asia time slot of 109, my highly heuristic "quickly browse through
registrartions and stat Amer/Europe/Asia" tells me that Amer may be as much as 50%,
and they are being screwed. Lengthening up the agenda would only help Amer, it
would help the community, and it would just create a bit more hassle for the other
two timezones which are otherwise pretty well served.

Cheers
    Toerless

On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 07:49:38PM +0100, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> This thread (re-)opens the question of the value of a full virtual meeting.
> 
> There is unquestionable (to me) value in the plenary session, and a few of
> the agenda-slot meetings are widely attended.
> 
> But it seems that the main draw of an in-person meeting is the interactions
> in the corridors and after people have spoken at agenda sessions. Also the
> ad hoc gatherings to advance topics. 
> It seems to me that most/all of this was missing at IETF-108 and is likely
> to be missing at IETF-109.
> 
> So what is left between the packed one-week agenda and a sparse three-month
> schedule of "interims".
> 
> Maybe the only benefit I can see is that rather than having to be out of bed
> every week for a poorly-scheduled interim, I can be out of bed for a whole
> week for the IETF week. I am not sure that is an advantage, especially when
> weighed against agenda clashes (at IETF-108 I tried listening to multiple
> audio streams at once, and it fried my poor brain).
> 
> So I'd like to see a renewed discussion of why we are doing this to
> ourselves.
> 
> (And yes, this discussion should probably be in schmoo)
> 
> (And, oh yes, what about the funding model)
> 
> Adrian
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WGChairs <wgchairs-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
> Sent: 19 October 2020 18:01
> To: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>
> Cc: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: IETF 109 Preliminary Agenda
> 
> 
> David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> wrote:
>     > It never occurred to me that there were people who would attend the
> entire
>     > 12Am-6Am meeting and had no expectation of people attending an
> expanded
>     > version of that.  It now appears that there are such people but I
> expect
>     > there will be very few.
> 
> Yes, there are many people who attend a meeting almost every single session,
> and often have conflicts.
> 
> Some of them are Area Directors (IESG), and IAB.
> But, many of them are just active members.
> 
> If your WG does not require or experience interactions with people outside
> some specific working set, then I recommend not dealing with this time zone.
> Hold a virtual interim meeting.  Hold a series of them.
> 
> The CELLAR WG, of which I'm co-chair, has met only once at an IETF meeting,
> for instance.
> It's a group of ~8 to ~12 people who are very github/ML focused, and who
> mostly work on these documents outside of their day$job.
> 
> {typing this in an editor that is saving it's files over NFSv4, btw}
> 
> --
> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks
> [
> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect
> [
> ]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails
> [
> 

-- 
---
tte@cs.fau.de