> On 3/24/08, Brian Dickson <briand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Eric Gray wrote: > > > > > This sort of scheduling problem is very well known > > > to be NP hard and trying to meet the scheduling conflict > > > matrix for 1500 to 2500 people would make the "N" large. > > > > > > > Universities have been doing this successfully for class scheduling for > > many years with great success. I would not necessarily classify it as > > "hard". > > > Define "successfully". > > Having been locked out of more than one course because of scheduling > conflicts, I would suggest that "successfully" to the university may > not be perceived as "successfully" to the students. I agree. I had to get special dispensation to miss a lecture each week for one course. I also had to arrange for someone to take notes for me for that lecture. Definitely sub-optimal. > Which, come to think of it, is the same position IETF finds itself in: > replace "university" with "IETF" and "students" with "attendees". > > -- > Clint (JOATMON) Chaplin > Principal Engineer > Corporate Standardization (US) > SISA > _______________________________________________ > IETF mailing list > IETF@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@xxxxxxx _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf