top posting: 1/ Agree with Ben for the need of having a WG to look into online meeting schedule. If we set up one, I guess the first task would be deciding how to quantify "betterness" of different solutions 2/ Agree with Bob that online meetings make it a lot more difficult to participate when the time doesn't agree with the local time. IETF 109 was 9pm-3am for me too, I chose to skip due to day job obligations. my 2 cents, Lixia > On Dec 29, 2020, at 8:50 AM, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Ben, > >> It's your prerogative to place those hard limits, sure. (109 was 9pm-3am for me and I managed, but I am very fortunate in my home environment.) But my understanding is that for any 6-hour block you pick, "the participants that get the hardest slot" will have that slow overlap with their midnight-6am window, and it's far from obvious that we want to always give the hardest slot to the same limited set of people. Hence, having a WG to consider it… > > Agreed. > > I had the same local times for IETF109 and dealt with it. The other challenge for many folks, is that unlike when you travel, when doing the meetings at home, it’s hard to turn off everything else in your life (work and personal) in your local day time. Make it even harder. > > I agree it is good to have a w.g. consider better solutions, but to me not all problems have better solutions. I think we are going to have to just live with the pain until we can meet face to face again. > > Bob
