On Oct 17, 2012, at 4:19 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
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?
One hopes he was looking for constructive engagement, such as IETF and IRTF do
during an IETF meeting. The interspersed meeting is on the same agenda as all
of the other meetings, and not on a separate track. The IETF doesn't promise
IRTF meeting slots, but if slots are available, it makes them available.