ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: For Review: IESG Statement on Guidance on Face-to-Face and Virtual Interim Meetings

2015-12-11 03:59:25
Hi Brian,
Hi,

I find these two statements somewhat inconsistent:

Extended sequences of virtual interim meetings should be the exception and not 
the norm
Recurring meetings (recommended if much debate is expected), may be scheduled 
together, with a single announcement.
I don't understand the inconsistency.
For example in NETMOD, we scheduled bi-weekly meetings until all open issues on a specific document were addressed. It doesn't mean that by default, we have recurrent meetings, and there is no agenda, we cancel the call.

Maybe you have an issue with the term "recommended"?
Also, I think that in the bullet list for virtual interim meetings, a
significant point (for some of us) is missing. Something like:

. IETF participants live in many different time zones. This must be taken into
account when scheduling. Recurring meetings should be arranged at varying
times of day to share the discomfort of late night or early morning calls
fairly.
We would need the equivalent of this sentence, currently listed for the face-to-face meeting:

     o The meetings must be scheduled (location/timing) with fair
       access for all working group participants.

Regarding your proposed sentence, we should trust the WG chairs to do what's right, instead of imposing more rules.
With a global community participation, scheduling calls becomes a nightmare.
A WG chair knows who the key players are in his WG (editor, authors, individuals in favor of the different solutions, etc.), i.e. the persons without without conclusions could not reached ... simply because the discussions would be repeated if they would be excluded.
The advice to my chairs wrt to interim meetings is:
- to have a successful interim, make sure all the key players are involved/included (*)
    - be fair in scheduling for everybody
- anyway we validate the decision on the mailing list for the people who can't attend.

In the past, I scratched my head on trying to express (*). All tentative sentence appeared as being non-inclusive.
So I would go for a generic sentence, maybe something such as:
The meetings must be scheduled (timing) with fair access for all working group participants.

Regards, Benoit

Regards
    Brian

.


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