Stig Venaas wrote:
Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
From: Tim Chown [mailto:tjc(_at_)ecs(_dot_)soton(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk]
Well, if we make remote participation too good, we may end up
with rather empty meeting rooms and a bankrupt IETF ;)
What we should do, given the rush of work that happens pre-ID
cutoff, is maybe look at such technology for interim
meetings, and have the IETF support some infrastructure to
help interim meetings run more
effectively, maybe even without a physical meeting venue. Some WGs
might then run more interim virtual meetings and help
distribute the workload over the year more smoothly.
You mean like holding a bi-weekly teleconference?
VOIP is getting to the point where this is practical.
Personally I find jabber (and similar technologies) much more convenient
than voice. I've used that a few times with a small group of people to
discuss and solve technical problems. I feel it allows more interactive
discussions and is also easier non-native English speakers,
Agreed. It is impossible to catch up voice-based communication again if
you miss it once.
In addition to this, jabber-based chats makes me - non native English
speaker (actually listener in
most of time) - verify whether I am following up the discussion or not.
Thanks to kind jabber scribers (surely including Stig) of WG meetings
that I have attended so far.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf