Partially agree. Just requiring a draft (that was not submitted within the meeting week) gives you a two-week waiting period. I'm not so sure about the mailing list requirement. One of the best presentations-posing-as-barBoF in IETF 77 was about a traceback experiment in Japan. They did write a draft, but I don't think there was a mailing list, and I don't know whether such a mailing list would have helped anyone. They only talked about what they had already done. I guess the requirement for a mailing list depends no whether you want to present something the IETF should (in your opinion) do, or whether you just want to present some information. We could have this requirement and allow ADs to waive it. ________________________________________ From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Donald Eastlake Sent: 01 August 2010 23:06 To: Joel M. Halpern Cc: IETF discussion list Subject: Re: Ad Hoc BOFs On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: ... 1) If there is no I-D and no mailing list, then no, you can not have a room suitable for 50+ people. ... +10**10 If there is no ID and no mailing list at least several weeks in advance, you should either have a real bar BoF with a handful of appropriate people, or you can seek opportunities to present at appropriate WG or Area meetings. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf