Eric-
I therefore suggest that we
either discontinue these many threads or else we establish
something like POISED to actually do something to scratch
these nagging itches.
Not a bad idea on the face of it. However, I believe that the hosts play a
large role in determining where we meet since they foot the six-figure bill
for the terminal room.
Should we establish a POISED-like discussion, then I would
like to introduce the following data points:
[nice list talking points deleted]
Your list is missing a couple of important points, or meta-points, about
IETF meetings. The overall goal of the meeting is to enable a 'higher
bandwidth' exchange for the working groups and the IETF as a whole. To have
a useful discussion, it's important to maximize attendance of the clueful,
contributors, and coders. To me this means we need to be mindful of the
expense of attendance, since many of these folks are academics, and travel
time/inconvenience, since the 'opportunity cost' of attendance may weed out
some of these important folks. Anywhere we host a meeting will be
inconvenient for some but it's the clueful, contributors, and coders who are
truely advancing the work of the IETF and these are the folks who should be
present.
Hmm, perhaps this is a good reason to resolve this discussion on the list
rather than in a meeting since, if we are going to change how we do things,
it's the people who participate online but aren't attending meetings now
that we want to have attending.
--aaron