--On Sunday, May 26, 2002 3:32 PM -0500 Pete Resnick
<presnick(_at_)qualcomm(_dot_)com> wrote:
It seems to me that exactly the same thing can be said about
POISSON and it gets along just fine conflicting with other
meetings.
Actually, Pete, POISSON didn't have a face to face meeting for
years, and the conflicts with other meetings are a large part of
the reason.
The people who will go to an IPR meeting instead of
going to another one are those folks who want to contribute to
setting IETF IPR policy. I think putting it on a day with no
other meetings *invites* people who may or may not care very
much, but are willing to rant on given the invitation.
But it also excludes conflicting WG Chairs and editors, along
with most of the IESG and at least part of the IAB. It is
valuable, I believe, to have those we charge with implementing
and interpreting policies present and participating when they
are shaped.
Furthermore, decisions of the IETF do not take place at
face-to-face meetings and it better not be *required* to
attend this meeting if you want to have input on IETF IPR
policy.
But Dave's comment is important here, I think: if we can get the
right people to this meeting, it may have some educational value
for those who want to contribute to IPR policy as amateur
lawyers. Uneducated decisions (or even positions and drafts)
that are made largely by those people can, at best, waste huge
amounts of time and energy.
john