On 21-jul-04, at 21:51, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
2. Move away from the session/break/session model. So rather than let the
rooms be empty for 1.5 hours during the lunch and dinner breaks, schedule
sessions more or less continuously. People who want to eat are no worse
off, as they still get to attend one session and eat during another,
while those who can't stand overlap now have a better chance of being
able to attend everything they want to.
seriously - I think this is a seriously bad idea, because it lessens the ability of people to schedule informal time together.
The first thing we should recognize is that between the two of us, we probably represent the two ends of the spectrum in IETF meeting attendee type: you being the chair and all, and me being a fairly casual IETF goer who participates mainly in one wg.
That being said, the informal scheduling thing isn't my experience. I've had a few of those during the breaks, but more often than not there isn't enough time or previous commitments so it's easier to find some mutually dead space in the schedule. This is usually doable for a three - four person group.
As the number of concurrent sessions becomes smaller, the opportunities for people with the same interests to find some "dead" time in the schedule increase. Only people who want to participate in pretty much everything won't benefit, but they have many problems now anyway.
But first and foremost we need to do SMARTER scheduling: even though I'm only really interested in the IPv6 stuff, idr, rpsec and grow, I've had overlapping sessions in all three meetings I attended. I would make a survey for that if I had the software...
Speaking of surveys: the results of Aaron's suggests that having session on sunday is probably a better idea than having them on friday...
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf