Fred, et.al.,
inline please
On 03/02/2021 02:36, Erik Kline wrote:
+manycouches@xxxxxxxx
On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 10:31 AM Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Looking at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-shmoo/ballot/, I noted that there is no mailing list for this. Had there been one, this note would have been posted to it. I apologize for the wide distribution.
I can see setting up a policy for meetings that are cancelled by Force Majuere, but the fact that we have had such doesn’t call for stopping having meetings. The fact is that face-to-face meetings have value - people can get to know each other and set up a social basis for discussion, if nothing else. I can see scaling back - our European colleagues find the summer meeting timing awkward at best. But I don;’t see the temporary effect of having a global pandemic as justification for simply shutting down to mailing lists - which would be the likely effect of failing to meet.
So yes, I think we would do well to meet for IETF 111 and on.
I agree, but think this is IETF 112, in the best case.
/Loa
Sent from my iPad
--
Loa Andersson email: loa@xxxxx
Senior MPLS Expert loa.pi.nu@xxxxxxxxx
Bronze Dragon Consulting phone: +46 739 81 21 64
