On 01-Oct-21 08:05, Keith Moore wrote: > On 9/26/21 1:14 PM, John C Klensin wrote: > >> Let me suggest one small example: When a WG decides to schedule >> an interim meeting, that announcement should go to the WG list >> and_maybe_ to an Area-wide list for the relevant area, not to >> IETF-announce. An interjection: that is a violation of the rule in RFC2026: For [sic] IETF and Working Group meetings announcements shall be made by electronic mail to the IETF Announce mailing list and shall be made sufficiently far in advance of the activity to permit all interested parties to effectively participate. Rules can be changed, of course, > As much as I hate the excessive number of announcements, the problem I > have with this idea is that the most important decisions tend to be made > in interim meetings. Interim meetings are sometimes used as a way to > railroad decisions through WGs by making them "done deals" before they > attract wider attention. That's arguable. As we inevitably move towards less international travel in the long run, I think we'll have to accept "interims" as the new normal. > But of course the real problem isn't too many announcements, so much as > over-use of interim meetings. But burying announcements for interim > meetings would seem to exacerbate that problem. I think the principle > that interim meetings are subject to the same rules for approval and > announcement as other meetings, is the right principle. As noted, it's not a principle, it's a rule. > Of course (especially in these pandemic days) interim meetings have > arguably become the "normal" meetings, with the 3-per-year meetings > becoming the odd ones. > > Still, a periodic IETF-wide calendar that's sent to the list where > meetings are announced, might be a good replacement for all of the > current individual announcements. Yes. Just another Updates: 2026. Brian
