Hello;
On Mar 25, 2006, at 1:28 AM, john.loughney@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Maybe we should leave the Jabber meeting rooms up all the time, and
use them for more dynamic discussions.
John
Do you mean during the meetings (which I think was done this time,
Monday - Friday) or
permanently ?
Regards
Marshall
- original message -
Subject: Re: Jabber chats (was: 2 hour meetings)
From: Stig Venaas <stig.venaas@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 03/24/2006 5:01 pm
Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
From: Tim Chown [mailto:tjc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Well, if we make remote participation too good, we may end up
with rather empty meeting rooms and a bankrupt IETF ;)
What we should do, given the rush of work that happens pre-ID
cutoff, is maybe look at such technology for interim
meetings, and have the IETF support some infrastructure to
help interim meetings run more
effectively, maybe even without a physical meeting venue. Some WGs
might then run more interim virtual meetings and help
distribute the workload over the year more smoothly.
You mean like holding a bi-weekly teleconference?
VOIP is getting to the point where this is practical.
Personally I find jabber (and similar technologies) much more
convenient
than voice. I've used that a few times with a small group of people to
discuss and solve technical problems. I feel it allows more
interactive
discussions and is also easier non-native English speakers,
I think using the wg jabber rooms we got for regular discussions of
specific issues is a great idea.
Stig
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf