> On 20 Apr 2020, at 10:21, Carsten Bormann <cabo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > +1 (except maybe for the somewhat optimistic spring 2021 prediction). Having hope is a good thing :) But taking it to the point of expecting any chance of a physical meeting in July this year going ahead seems at best blind optimism. Just cancel it now and ensure we have the best possible online experience instead. Tim > Grüße, Carsten > > >> On 2020-04-20, at 11:17, Tim Chown <tjc.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On 20 Apr 2020, at 02:26, Alissa Cooper <alissa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> Indeed, although the criteria may need to continue to evolve somewhat, it will be very useful to understand the community’s views about the assessment framework proposed for IETF 108 when it comes time to make decisions about 109, 110, and potentially other future meetings that are already scheduled and booked. >> >> I think there is absolutely no chance of holding IETF 108 as a physical meeting in Madrid in July. That should be cancelled now, and planning for an all virtual meeting started asap. >> >> That said, there will be a point at which physical meetings could resume, so the framework is very useful to help judge when that should be, and perhaps the 2021 spring meeting is most likely. >> >> Someone made the point that it's not just about the situation in Madrid or Spain, as we all would need to fly through various countries to get there. And it’s not just about whether the Spanish government says large gatherings are allowed. As Brian said it’s about our appetite to travel, as a community. I would certainly not have any intention to travel, as things look now, until 2021 at the earliest; if a large majority share that view, then a physical meeting is simply not practical. >> >> Tim >
