ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input

2016-05-22 13:02:35
Hang on a moment, Melinda:


On 5/22/16 7:39 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
On 5/22/16 7:18 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
What I find worrying is that we may end up foreclosing participation to
new members because of their governments' laws.  They need to be
considered in this discussion, and thus far it feels as though they have
not been, and often aren't.

You know, I've been arguing for a long time that we would
benefit a lot from making the organization less dependent on
meetings, and the feedback I've gotten from you and others
taking the position that it's okay to meet in locations
like Singapore is that no, we really need face-to-face discussions
and hallway conversations.  

I didn't actually make that argument.  I do agree that more use of
online mechanisms is better.  But this discussion isn't about that. 
This discussion is about how we choose venues when we're going to have f2fs.

Early in this discussion everybody
agreed that yes, our top priority is getting work done, but
here you are suggesting that maybe getting work done can take
a backseat to making sure that people who are not currently
involved and not doing any IETF work can attend.  Then there's
the notion that we do our work on mailing list being chucked
aside to be replaced by the flat statement that if someone
cannot attend a meeting we are foreclosing participation by
them (with the implied suggestion that the requirements of
people who are not yet involved trump the requirements of
some long-time participants).

Sorry- but there is no doubt that f2f meetings are high bandwidth
compared to any electronic form of communication.  And I'm saying that
if we're going to have them we have a choice of who we disadvantage, for
surely we will disadvantage someone.  This discussion is about how that
choice is made.

Eliot


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

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