ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: I-D Action: draft-jaeggli-interim-observations-00.txt

2012-10-16 12:21:06
o Co-location with RIPE appeared useful. I agree with you Joel that
  tighter packing would have made a difference. I met some people who
  noted they will not attend, but probably would have attended if it
  was during the week. Co-locating individual WG interims with RIPEs
  and NANOGs seems like a useful concept to consider in the future.

ripe/foonog would not appreciate a meeting in schedule conflict.  would
ietf appreciate a foonog meeting scheduled in conflict with and at the
same venue as an ietf meeting?

fwiw, sidr has met adjacent to a few foonogs and it was quite worthwhile
to have the extra ops that brought in.  i wonder if it would be good to
have a sidr meeting adjacent to a security meeting.  oops, we did that
too i think.

o LIMs will not create a new big funding source for the IETF. We
  should also right-size our organization for the task at hand. 30,
  50, or even 100 people could probably be handled as part of the
  RIPE meeting, and might have been something that the RIPE
  registration system and agenda could have accommodated, or have
  someone sponsor a room and leave the rest to participants.

foonog meeting coordination folk are generally very accommodating and
generous.  but beware that, often due to association with organizations
which have a monopoly on scarce intergers and thus pre-crash budget
contraints, foonogs often meet at expensive venues.

randy