Re: Unhosted IETF meetings (was: Re: reflections from the trenches of ietf62 wireless)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



 On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 07:15:15 -0600, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
>  - I've been hearing continued discussion in the hallway of "X can't
>  get into the US for the IETF due to immigration issues". If we're more
>  successful finding sponsors outside the US than inside the US,
>  sponsorship may be yet another reason to move to a "two IETFs/year
>  outside the US" model.
>
>  FWIW, I found Carsten's note terrifying, but can't argue accuracy with
>  him:
>
> >  Right now, if you need significant discussion in a WG, it seems you
> >  have to schedule an interim.


Using the Seoul IETF as an exemplar, attendance by "regular contributors" was 
quite poor.  We need to worry not just about overall attendance, but 
attendance by people who get the work done.

In a very real sense, we do not require IETF meeting scheduling requests to 
obligate the requests' organizers to get any productive work done.  If we 
treated IETF meeting time as the scarce, valuable resource that it really is, 
we would almost certainly require more up-front and "objectives-based" 
planning.  I suspect that would also lead to fewer meeting slots, which might 
allow for more time available to the groups that do want to have significant 
discussion.


  d/
  ---
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  +1.408.246.8253
  dcrocker  a t ...
  WE'VE MOVED to:  www.bbiw.net



_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]