Maybe for WG sessions we should just let the WG chairs determine the timeframe that works best for the participants rather than imposing a time zone on a top-down basis? To use an extreme example, if all the participants are in UTC then why force them all to meet in UTC+10 for their session? Letting each WH choose their meeting times seems a potentially better way to go, though common sessions like the plenary could adhere to a common time zone. I'm sure conflict avoidance may be an issue but I'm sure this could be sorted during the draft schedule stage.
Jason
(personal view - no hat)
On 9/21/20, 8:06 PM, "ietf on behalf of Fred Baker" <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx on behalf of fredbaker.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I disagree that Pacific/CEST time difference is “difficult”; I have actually dealt with it in the past and found it survivable. Start with the typical IETF agenda in San Francisco, and move times 4.5 hours (half of nine) earlier. It means west coasters have to get up earlier and Europeans later, but it is not “difficult”. It’s just “inconvenient”.
Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways...
> On Sep 21, 2020, at 11:45 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, the time zone considerations make things really difficult
