Re: Remote Participation Services

[Simon Pietro Romano <spromano@xxxxxxxx>]

Hi Michael,

+1 for the deadline
- 1 for the unified slide deck: from my experience with Meetecho, this is not always a good idea, both because of the deck's dimensions and of the difficulties in automatically recognizing speakers' switches (e.g. for the recordings of the single presentations).

My 2 cents,

Simon

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> ha scritto:

"Thomas" == Thomas Narten <narten@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Thomas> IMO, what is missing is operational Best Practices. We seem
Thomas> to be lacking them (are any written down?) And we don't
Thomas> follo!
 w them
consistently, especially from one WG to
Thomas> another. Many of the problems I see with remote
Thomas> participation facilties have to do not with the technology
Thomas> per se, but with lack of proper training and advance
Thomas> testing. I get the general sense that getting the remote

+5.

I am setting a deadline for slides for IETF86 for my WG, and I will be
doing a unified slide deck.  I might allow text on a slide to be
updated the day before... but no slides, no speak.