What I have observed is that the discussions in the face to
face WG meetings are very useful, and frequently result in
resolution (to be ratified by the WG's mailing list) of both
technical and procedural issues (if the meetings are not
useful for these purposes, why are we doing this in the first
place).
In addition, the number of people present certainly poses a
logistical problem (ie. the rooms/hallways were too small),
and in this way might have hurt WG progress (i.e., you
couldn't get in). However, as I noted, the damage is due to
logistical factors which are within our (IETF) control (i.e.,
get a bigger hotel). Said another way, I do not believe that
the increased number of people has harmed the S/N ratio in any
of my WGs, nor any that I attended. The people who participate
participate and the people who don't don't. I don't have
a problem with that.
Finally, adopting draconian measures that make the IETF some
kind of secret/privileged society will mark the beginning of
the end of the its usefulness. I would hate to see that
happen.
Dave
[BTW, none of this addresses the value of what happens in
the hallways and bars]
According to Scott Brim:
On 19 Dec 2000 at 11:08 -0800, Matthew Goldman apparently wrote:
Speaking for myself, but I'm sure this applies to more than just me: I read
the relevant RFCs and drafts ("did my homework"), but I am not "active" by
the strict definitions some have used in this thread (at least not yet). I
pre-paid the meeting fee (in good faith that in return for accepting my
meeting fee, the IETF would provide meeting facilities commensurate to
enable my participation), I paid for travel and went. I followed all IETF
policies and procedures. Therefore, do I not have the "right" to be able to
sit comfortably in a meeting room and be able to hear the speakers, and
participate if I chose to, as much as anyone else?
Why did you go? What did you get out of it that you didn't get out of
the mailing list? Results of in-person meetings are never final, and
can be challenged by mail if you have good engineering reasons to do so.
(I admit this is sometimes mostly theory, but you can appeal to the IESG
if you think practice is deviating too much from theory.)
If you strictly limit attendance to a meeting room based on previous
participation, you will have no new participation, or "cross fertilization"
of ideas (as someone stated).
Participation by mail before participation in person.
...Scott