On Nov 11, 2009, at 12:14 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
My much greater concern, as I tried to make clear, is where we draw the line about expanding meetings. Maybe the right answer is that we stop after the Thursday evening plenary. Maybe before noon on Friday. Maybe the end of the day Friday. Maybe we should be expanding into the following week. Maybe the ITU is right and SG meetings lasting two or three weeks are reasonable. But, sooner or later, we need to stop and start prioritizing.
This is totally reasonable, desirable, and, while not orthogonal, independent of making the meeting stop sharp for normal attendees and punctuating the stop with the technical plenary.
The technical plenary should be the last thing you need to attend if you come for "the IETF meeting". Like it was.
The problem that putting the technical plenary at the end solves is not the meeting size creep, but having a declared "normal day" that's actually clearly not normal.
-- Stanislav Shalunov BitTorrent Inc shalunov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx personal: http://shlang.com _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf