FWIW ...
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 12:40 PM Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton=40cisco.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Carsten,
I think that what you propose is a good idea. Or at least, it is worth trying to see what happens.
I also like Carsten's suggestion. What follows is one thing we could do, within the scope of his suggestion (we could do other things as well, of course).
The timezones issue is of course tricky.
For a given 'day', I would suggest that we organize 3 sessions 8 hours apart, and then folks can join one or more depending on their time zones. E.g., perhaps something like 2am, 10am, & 6 pm UTC.
I've ended up as a co-chair in ART, and a couple of IETFs ago, the ART ADs had a gathering for the ART chairs, that was scheduled very much like you suggested (observing that the ART chairs spanned the globe, so three sessions with start times at about 8 hour intervals, lasting a couple of hours each). So there's at least prior art about that.
Somewhat counterintuitively, I was on two of those three slots (and I think others were on more than one slot, as well). So ISTM that there are people who want to talk to people outside their preferred timezone, if it's not too painful. Perhaps that would be easier, if the three slots weren't back to back on the same day.
I would probably try and keep it at the same weekday/times each month, since that is easier to put in a calendar.
Sending out a reminder the day before may also encourage participation.
I also note that we didn't have a HotRFC session for IETF 110, which I've found VERY helpful in moving new work proposals forward. I wonder if having monthly HotRFC sessions between IETF meetings would be better than trying to cram them in just before/during IETF meetings.
Best,
Spencer
