+1. Very strongly.
Whether the logistics of space and times could be worked out or
not, poster sessions strike me as a really bad idea and Fred has
summarized at least most of the reasons. If we had a high
barrier to posting I-Ds, it might be different. But we don't.
john
--On Monday, January 10, 2011 14:38 -0800 Fred Baker
<fred(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> wrote:
On Jan 10, 2011, at 5:56 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
You can go, read the poster and formulate opinions and
questions independently of anyone else, including the author.
If there is a time when the author is supposed to be present,
you can then go back and clarify any issues. You can't
establish any consensus this way, but it can be efficient at
resolving issues.
I'm attaching a chart that may be useful in this discussion.
Using the rsync-able directory of all IETF ID's since 1992
(btw, I don't believe the database before about 1996, but 14
years is still interesting data), I did a brief scan of the
arrival of drafts to the Internet Draft directory. The blue
line shows the arrivals by month; the red bar graph tries
(somewhat crudely) to aggregate drafts-by-IETF-meeting.
I'm envisioning the process and requirements of the poster
sessions. In terms of process, today if I post a -00 draft to
a working group, I can generally get discussion during the
coming IETF meeting. What I think this suggests is that
instead I would show a poster at the coming meeting and get
working group discussion the meeting following. I'm not sure I
like that implication.
I'm also thinking about the implications of 500-or-so posters.
In terms of simple floor space, if we presume a poster and the
conversation in front of it occupy a 3 meter-by 3 meter (10' X
10') space, we need 4500 square meters or 50,000 square feet
of floor space to park them in. Time-wise, we need to assume
that 1/3-to-1/2 of people who attend an IETF meeting will,
instead of chairing or presenting in sessions, be out standing
by their posters - and not wandering around looking at other
posters. The mechanics look a little daunting.
Personally, call me stuck-in-the-mud, but this isn't an
academic conference in which grad students are advertising for
a professor that might be interested in mentoring them or a
sponsor might fund their research. This is an SDO, and
internet drafts are what any other SDO calls "contributions"
or "work in progress". I would far rather have people who ant
to talk about something contribute an internet draft on their
topic, and talk with other people about their ideas - whether
on working group lists or other places. For those of us that
*do* participate, it seems to mostly work.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf