Le 06/03/2020 à 14:40, Phillip Hallam-Baker a écrit :
On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 8:30 PM Alissa Cooper <alissa@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:alissa@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
One thing that becomes obvious while serving in the IETF leadership
is that no-win situations are unavoidable. If you try to make
decisions based on objective criteria and take your time to gather
data, you get criticized. If you try to make decisions based on
anecdotal evidence or take what seems to be the path of least
resistance, you get criticized. If you follow the advice of one
group of participants, you get criticized by a different group that
disagrees. It can seem like an endless, thankless torrent of
messages telling you that no matter what you do, it’s wrong and it
isn’t good enough.
So I’d like to say thank you to everyone on the IESG, Colin, Jay,
Greg, the team at AMS, and the WG and RG chairs for all they’ve done
thus far to help manage the IETF 107 meeting planning in light of
COVID-19.. Your work is appreciated.
Alissa
Quite, this is not a decision you should be taking. It is a decision
the government should have taken. Cancelling IETF is not going to
have a significant impact on the spread of COVID, it only makes
sense if there is government leadership and we don't have that.
China did the math: 2% of 1 billion people is 20 million. If this
thing takes hold, it is going to kill more people than WWII.
At the moment everyone is focused on Vancouver. But we are almost
certain to see most sporting events including the Olympics cancelled
and at least one of the US political conventions. I would start
looking at contingency plans for the case we are told that 108 and
109 are cancelled by government order.
The impact of government travel restrictions is going to be
significant. But that is not going to be the only effect of this
crisis. There is going to be a desperate need for technology that
allows people to communicate and work remotely.
I agree. That is a big need right now.
There is also a need of electronic voting systems for those who need to
vote soon.
And we are the people who are supposed to provide the open,
interoperable solutions.
I agree.
Openness and way of working can also be used as a good example.
For example, I am still waiting for my humble request since 2 days to
access GISAID database to see what looks like a digital form of this
virus, because I optimistically imagine open access to data might help
someone unthought of up to know to calculate some solution to the problem.
Alex
Skype, Zoom, WebEx, Keybase, Signal etc. are all fine for
collaboration inside enterprises. But none of them is a replacement
for email or the telephone because none of them can talk to each
other. We need a federated, open solution. And the IETF is the place
people are going to be looking to develop that.
