Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Historically there has been a pushback on a WG holding an interim
> meeting instead of meeting at an IETF main meeting. Yes, cross-WG
> communication and all that.
Virtual Interim meetings are a really good thing. 3-4 hour block of time.
The challenge is that all of the COTS providers (G+, webex, lync, goto*)
all have constraints that affect at least some group of people.
Our pure webrtc solution (JITSI.tools) does not (yet) work in as many
browsers as one would like... and the I* seem reluctant as a group
to try new things.
> Particularly early on in a WG, a two day interim can be a lot more use
> than a two hour main meeting event.
At two-day interim, an in-person meeting is definitely very valuable,
particularly early on in a WG's life, but there are significant issues if one
can't get all the critical participants to the meeting.
And a two-day in-person interim with a few remote participants is far less
useful than three 4-hour virtual interims, in my opinion.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature