On Aug 6, 2010, at 10:44 PM, Bob Hinden wrote:
> During my IAOC chair plenary talk at IETF78 (slides are in the proceedings) I asked a question about continuing the current meeting policy (3 in North America, 2 in Europe, 1 in Asia in two year period (3-2-1) ) or changing to a 1-1-1 policy based on current meeting attendance. The talk included a graph of attendance by continent for IETF72-IETF78. I was asked to provide this data to the community.
>
> It is attached. It includes the raw data and a new graph that shows attendance by percentage. It appears to me that a 1-1-1 meeting policy is justified by current overall IETF meeting attendance.
>
> Your comments are appreciated.
I read the thread and I am happy we are not basing our decision based on the geographical spread of the persons who participated in this discussion. :->
As a rhetoric question: The IAOC will not be the judge of the consensus on this topic, will it? We leave that to the general AD?
Personally I believe that the aspect of going where our contributors come from should be weighed most heavily and I agree with Jari that there are different statistics that should be taken into account (like draft authorship). However, I also believe that the outreach component is an important one to the viability/goodwill of/towards the organization.
Whatever the numbers X-Y-Z turn out to be (and I would consent with 1-1-1 and 2-1-1) I am in favor of moving towards the X-Y-Z-* model that Peter and Frederico alluded to.
--Olaf
--Olaf
________________________________________________________
Olaf M. Kolkman NLnet Labs
Science Park 140,
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ 1098 XG Amsterdam
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf