At 12:17 PM 3/10/2005, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
--On 10. mars 2005 07:50 -0800 Joel Jaeggli <joelja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In our draft you'll see that we're pretty explicit in that our goal is to build a service that is light-weight enough that it can be provided at a very low cost, and across all the meetings. nothwithstanding any other infusions of funding or volunteer energy, staying focused on keeping it light is paramount.
I (seeing this as recommendation to my successors) also think that having a light, basic service that we know we can afford to provide is a good starting point for building more extensive services - figure out if they're worth building, figure out how much they will cost, figure out how to pay for them and staff them, then build them.
<ietfcast@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> is a good place to discuss what the next steps should be.
I think Joel's done a stellar job of providing this service this time - thanks a lot, Joel!
As someone who's been beating the drum for remote attendance for some time, I have to say the audio setup this time was outstanding. I was only able to listen in on a limited number of sessions, but that was enough for me to hear the discussion on a draft I'm working on. Video would not have added anything of value in reality.
Kudos to all involved in setting up this service. Even if other services are added later, this sets a baseline service level for broadcasting from the meetings that provides a meaningful way to participate for folks unable to make it to the meetings.
Dan
P.S. Yes, there's some work to do on providing a way for remote folks to have their response comments heard. Jabber is fine for that, provided someone in the WG meeting speaks up to express what's being said on the channel.
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf