On 16.03.24 06:37, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
Another related issue is sending slides largely ahead of time, but the chair waits the last minute to post them, thus depriving people of the time to ponder questions and comments. I just cancelled my presentation when that happened to me. Conversely, I probably should say on the mic that I would have commented or asked questions on a presentation, but there was not enough time to think about it. But it could be worse: slides could be posted after the presentation (it happened at least once).
Just to add another thing to the discussion:Especially for WG meetings where I'm not a constant participant, but mostly an interested observer, it helps a lot if the meeting materials include a link to the drafts AND have the datatracker state as well.
Naturally the presentations are not uploaded weeks before, and chairs need to ask for agenda items before they can post an agenda. But even before a draft agenda is posted, it would be nice if the chairs were to include the drafts that should be discussed.
Looking at https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/materials, there seem to be a lot of WGs that don't do that. A draft could be added the moment the chairs get a request for a presentation slot, so people can start reading the draft without knowing the agenda (and people like me can scroll through the materials page and look for any draft names that sound interesting, without having to open the agenda for each WG)
A nice side-effect is that in the draft history, every addition to a WG session is recorded, so if someone wants to research on a specific draft, i.e. what discussion items were raised, they can easily do so.
But on the topic of the pre-meeting posting deadlines, I can say that I personally benefit from the deadline, I'm posting notoriously last-weekend-before-deadline. I agree with most of the statements made previously, that it is good to have time to read the spec, without having to "fear" that the spec changes while reading. But again, this is different depending on the WG, if a WG decides to do most of their work on Github, the posting of a new I-D version may become something that is done irregularly, and the WG discussion will be about the open Github issues. If someone only read the draft in the datatracker, but the Github version is 10 steps ahead, this is frustrating.
I think it would be good to have some common understanding of the different processes, and - to not artificially raise the bar for newcomers - document to the best of our abilities, where the main work is done for each working group.
Since I'm relatively new - what was the "-00 special" that Carsten mentioned?
Cheers, Janfred -- Herr Jan-Frederik Rieckers Security, Trust & Identity Services E-Mail: rieckers@xxxxxx | Fon: +49 30884299-339 | Fax: +49 30884299-370 Pronomen: er/sein | Pronouns: he/him __________________________________________________________________________________DFN - Deutsches Forschungsnetz | German National Research and Education Network
Verein zur Förderung eines Deutschen Forschungsnetzes e.V. Alexanderplatz 1 | 10178 Berlin https://www.dfn.deVorstand: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Stefan Wesner | Prof. Dr. Helmut Reiser | Christian Zens
Geschäftsführung: Dr. Christian Grimm | Jochem Pattloch VR AG Charlottenburg 7729B | USt.-ID. DE 136623822
<<attachment: smime.p7s>>
