--On Thursday, November 8, 2018 18:01 +0100 Mikael Abrahamsson
<swmike@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2018, John C Klensin wrote:
>
>> When I've seen something equivalent to "if you want something
>> repeated in the room, start it with 'to mic:'", I take it to
>> mean "Jabber input is preferred in this session to use of
>> remote queues". Maybe that will go away over time as we all
>> get used to the remote queue facility but, for the near term,
>> I'd much prefer to see something more like "if you have input
>> for the room and don't find the remote queue facility
>> convenient, type your message into Jabber and preface it with
>> 'MIC:'"
>
> I have never considered that people might take it this way.
Perhaps I'm an anomaly, but I've had enough experience with WGs
in which people in the remote queue are just not called on or
gotten to that, absent explicit confirmation that a particular
WG is actually using it, I end up relying on small clues, even
somewhat suspect ones. I am, however, at least as concerned
about giving people who are remote with less experience of the
IETF's practices and tools than I have good hints about what is
available.
> For me it was never an encouragement, it was mostly just to
> announce my services as a relayer of information. I will in
> the future also try to mention the remote queue facility so
> that people consider both. Thanks for sharing your view on
> this topic so I can improve.
Understood and appreciated.
> My experience with remote queue facility is that many people
> seem not used to remote voice/video setup and tend to have
> problems getting their voice quality right. I do voice/video
> conferencing from my computer ~10 times a week and this is a
> common thing. Many things can go wrong with VoIP and it does
> require a well-working setup for things to work well. I
> encourage people to test their setup before the meeting. I've
> seen everything from choppy audio which typically (from my
> experience in fault-finding VoIP issues) tend to be bad wifi
> connectivity or WAN connectivity (bufferbloat), to clipping
> microphones due to either bad quality microphone or wrong gain
> setting, to all kinds of other problems.
Indeed. And that is precisely why Meetecho suggests running
their test procedures and sorting things out as needed well
before the relevant meeting or WG session. It is also why they
try to require that and somewhat more for anyone who is planning
to do a presentation from a remote location rather than just
participating. Again, this is no one's fault in particular
(although, as with many other things, the finger for making sure
the right things happen ultimately points at the IESG) but the
community needs, IMO, to do _much_ better at cluing people,
especially newcomer-type people, in.
Again, thanks for your help. I very much appreciate anyone who
is willing to act as a Jabber scribe, especially those who take
is seriously and try to do a good job.
john
