> Almost half of the responses said this. This seems like an inherent > problem with virtual meetings, probably accounts for the answers > to question 1, "In what region do you live?”. This showed 53% > from US and Canada, and 31% from Europe. Very little elsewhere. > I wish there was a solution to this, but it’s clearly going to have a > significant effect on IETF attendance until we can start having face > to face meetings again. Very good points, Bob. It may see perverse, but I found it hard to justify a time zone change (i.e., staying up late) for a two hour virtual meeting. It is always a lot easier to think about doing that for five days of wall-to-wall meetings with useful corridors and side meetings. I suspect that if there had been more virtual meetings scheduled, I might have been more inclined to spend more time on West Coast time. Madrid is a difficult measure to use on me because it's only an hour off my time zone. However, if I was to attend remotely, I would certainly like to see a full agenda. Whether that is necessarily over five days or perhaps a less rushed six or seven days, could be debated. I must say that I am finding the current tribble of "IETF 107" interim meetings a bit difficult. Maybe my fault for following so many WGs, but having to monitor when meetings are, finding agendas showing up late, and attending out-of-hours meetings every few days, is a bind. We could probably do better. A
