On Nov 11, 2009, at 12:14 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
My much greater concern, as I tried to make clear, is where we
draw the line about expanding meetings. Maybe the right answer
is that we stop after the Thursday evening plenary. Maybe
before noon on Friday. Maybe the end of the day Friday. Maybe
we should be expanding into the following week. Maybe the ITU
is right and SG meetings lasting two or three weeks are
reasonable. But, sooner or later, we need to stop and start
prioritizing.
This is totally reasonable, desirable, and, while not orthogonal,
independent of making the meeting stop sharp for normal attendees and
punctuating the stop with the technical plenary.
The technical plenary should be the last thing you need to attend if
you come for "the IETF meeting". Like it was.
The problem that putting the technical plenary at the end solves is
not the meeting size creep, but having a declared "normal day" that's
actually clearly not normal.
--
Stanislav Shalunov
BitTorrent Inc
shalunov(_at_)bittorrent(_dot_)com
personal: http://shlang.com
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf