-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 4/12/16 04:50, Ted Lemon wrote: > Agree about Buenos Aires. We already do excellent virtual > interims--I think if your standard for whether we can do a virtual > IETF is that virtual interims work, we are already there. > > I think that if we want to test this idea, what we need to do is > designate some future IETF virtual _now_, and then start > preparing, rather than say "oh, we should do a virtual" and then > dither about when we might be ready. We will never be so ready > that a virtual IETF feels identical to an in-person IETF, so let's > just abandon that idea and get started on making a virtual IETF > that, while different, is still a success. +1 on the approach. I'm not a huge proponent of virtual meetings, but setting deadlines motivates us. This should not be news to anyone. - -- Ted Faber <theodore.v.faber@xxxxxxxx> Engineering Specialist Computer Systems Research Department 310-336-7373 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXDQ4UAAoJEFNjQnOBW8uOb8wP/jE8U9OcbcRzjTRphDMJ2svI 5TP/DFtwy/IvJhoOiE75YDtFOTr9I4hVC7FjX/cCrCWuG+nna7xAFWIPjU3JE5MU 8C+O39eb6kAsR1huFksG1EHR5SHa3hzzNuHG+gRgW9KwRGyv0TvT5D69Kh0T0L+Y cl0clJ9qceRSnWuNYUeRBRMC6dJi0JIlHnROSCC1EEfc3rBIN5pquhNQy7qrlCsG ecrjlKhtbpOc8FKOEC9Ao003hwnT/2N30FpOOYaXgDubmhdkiY50jIwa7p3AhJYu bFFLYgft1DuHnmBreuRVYYmM2wa5peGbDPZhLjYPoWxtnMGU9cvju9e0Lozg7cJZ GKiHtPzJ9O+pgcobN11fi6b9BXB0KM1Qd/ZpiBSmqcuS+7q+aLorja9gWo5kb9Ar 10WAPAWzcRxUQBbS9fCp3kLdyxuI0JBAZkn/vQpgm2DTOlF42kIqPxKfMPhs7MJt s1jeEImmBi3mhayey/fgO6u2QO8sNUKj8NztaAWw02PH2eZPO52q3bt6NCHo61at ZZLkcH5k4k3gOEm9W5K/0c1XQwONEXMZla7NzVcuVI8ujlyArk4Igu2PEHrtYK/d I2dDvVE1KNgWexd0fQksdSTF28hiDHzJP9vwljAUmx+MrIDD1UwtFOnoYGT+7+Pj gUnFPIcRE+95ID6+WF8L =fPsz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----