ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Proposed Experiment: More Meeting Time on Friday for IETF 73

2008-07-24 08:10:53
Can you enumerate the various options? Thanks.

On Jul 23, 2008, at 12:14 PM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:

Dear Eric;

On Jul 22, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Eric Burger wrote:

I will take a swag...

On the one hand, having had (and, believe it or not, this time by request) work group meetings on Friday morning, the Friday slot is an excellent filter to ensure that only the die-hard participants and those people paying their own way who need a Saturday Night Stay(tm) attend.

On the other hand, this guarantees more than a week away from home. If you have no family or life or want to stay away from said family or life, this would be a good thing. However, for the rest of us, this is not an attractive option.

Since Pandora's Box is now formally open, how about this: since the Internet Area has a lion's share of slots, and RAI draws huge crowds, what if we went summer / winter olympics and (gasp!) add a fourth annual meeting, but not have all areas meet at all meetings.

This is my option 4. I think that a variant, call it 4.a, might also be useful :

Have 4 meetings per year, but close the meeting down Thursday evening. This would save a little money per meeting, raise more money for the IETF (by having 4 meetings) and would mean that for most of us, the IETF would only eat 1 weekend, not 2.

Here are the stats. I don't think that adding even a 4 day meeting could be scheduled before 2010, if then.

Option    Extra          Rough Cost / Year     Biggest Drawback IMHO
        Slots / year
1         48-72          $ 100,000 to 140,000  Staying Friday night
2         108            $  90,000             Staying late at night
3 48 $ 140,000 AD availability, collisions 4 117 highly profitable Extra travel, would have to wait till at least 2010 4.a 97 profitable Extra travel, would have to wait till at least 2010 5 24-32 neutral or profit Extra travel, inefficient for attendees

Regards
Marshall




Yes, for me that just means four meetings to go to instead of three. However, one would hope we could get the work done Monday - Friday, instead of Saturday - Saturday, which we really are talking about here. Moreover, there really are people that will never venture outside their area, no matter how much we tell them it is important for them, and the IETF as a whole, to do it. Thus, rather than fighting physics, let us embrace gravity and make for a more sensible schedule all around.

On Jul 17, 2008, at 5:33 PM, IETF Chair wrote:

The IESG is considering an experiment for IETF 73 in Minneapolis, and
we would like community comments before we proceed.  Face-to-face
meeting time is very precious, especially with about 120 IETF WGs
competing for meeting slots. Several WGs are not able to get as much
meeting time as they need to progress their work.  As an experiment,
we are considering adding two Friday afternoon one-hour meeting slots.
The proposed Friday schedule would be:

0900-1130 Morning Session I
1130-1300 Break
1300-1400 Afternoon Session I
1415-1515 Afternoon Session II

Please share your thoughts about this proposed experiment.  The
proposed experiment will be discussed on the IETF Didcussion mail
list (ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org).


_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>