My comment is that we need to ensure that the selection specification
includes the time of meeting as well (please add in the charer). Also I
want to suggest to add one other specification that makes details of the
way of evaluation of the meeting outcomes. In IETF meetings we need to have
a system that gets feedback of outcomes and will help in the selection
specification. Evaluation methods are alot but we need to find the best
specification to know and to help develop our outcomes and policies. If you
have a best practice evaluation methods then you will have a best practice
meeting-policy and selection specification. Furthermore, in organizations
the evaluation method can change depending on interaction/technology
changes.
Therefore, update:
+++++ old +++++
The working group shall produce guidance on two areas:
1. A specification of the geographic IETF meeting policy, currently
described as the "1-1-1-*" policy. The policy going forward is up to
the working group.
2. A specification that describes the detailed meeting venue selection
process and criteria, the contents of which are also up to the working
group.
The specification(s) are expected to be Best Current Practice (BCP)
documents. The specifications are expected to provide clear guidance
to meeting selections, be implementable in our operating environment,
and take into account the needs of the highly diverse IETF community.
Milestones:
Mar 2016 - Initial individual draft on venue selection process and
criteria
Jul 2016 - Initial individual draft on IETF meeting geographic
distribution policy
Nov 2016 - Submission of the final working group draft on IETF meeting
geographic distribution policy to the IESG
Feb 2017 - Submission of the final working group draft on venue
selection process and criteria to the IESG
+++++++ New ++++++
The working group shall produce guidance on three areas:
1. A specification of the geographic IETF meeting policy, currently
described as the "1-1-1-*" policy. The policy going forward is up to
the working group.
2. A specification that describes the method of evaluating meeting venue
outcomes,
and feedback of participants (both types; attended and remote).
3. A specification that describes the detailed meeting venue selection
process and criteria, the contents of which are also up to the working
group.
The specification(s) are expected to be Best Current Practice (BCP)
documents. The specifications are expected to provide clear guidance
to meeting policy and selection, be implementable in our operating
environment,
and take into account the needs of the highly diverse IETF community.
Milestones:
Mar 2016 - Initial individual draft on venue selection process and
criteria
Jul 2016 - Initial individual draft on venue outcomes and
evaluation.
Jul 2016 - Initial individual draft on IETF meeting geographic
distribution policy
Nov 2016 - Submission of the final working group draft on venue
outcome evaluation to the IESG
Feb 2017 - Submission of the final working group draft on venue
selection process and criteria to the IESG
Mar 2017 - Submission of the final working group draft on IETF meeting
geographic distribution policy to the IESG
Best Regards
AB
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 7:26 PM, The IESG <iesg-secretary(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
wrote:
A new IETF WG has been proposed in the General Area. The IESG has not
made any determination yet. The following draft charter was submitted,
and is provided for informational purposes only. Please send your
comments to the IESG mailing list (iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org) by 2016-06-27.
Meeting Venue (mtgvenue)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Current status: Proposed WG
Chairs:
TBD
Assigned Area Director:
Jari Arkko <jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net>
General Area Directors:
Jari Arkko <jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net>
Mailing list:
Address: mtgvenue(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue
Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=mtgvenue
Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-mtgvenue/
The selection of meeting venues for our physical meetings is a common
area of discussion at the IETF and feedback for the IAOC and its
meeting committee.
A specification of the venue selection process and criteria would be
useful. With community discussion and agreement such a specification
will be very helpful in improving the process and ensuring that the
relevant criteria are properly identified.
The discussion itself may also be helpful. For instance, due to recent
discussions, potential future destinations are announced to the
community to help identify potential issues early.
These processes and criteria support the overall IETF meeting
strategy. The IETF complements its mostly online work with three
physical meetings each year, obviously for the purpose of the
standards development work but also for the opportunities for
high-bandwidth collaboration, cross-pollination of ideas, and focusing
on running code. Existing geographic distribution policy explicitly
calls for rotating meeting locations equally among the largest sources
of IETF attendees, previously defined as North America, Europe, and
Asia, while reserving a possibility for exceptions. The exceptions
are, for instance, meetings outside those regions. The rationale is to
meet in different geographic regions in order to spread the difficulty
and cost of travel among the attendees. The rotation policy, known as
the 1-1-1-* model -- with the asterisk denoting the exceptions -- was
set by the IESG, documented in
https://iaoc.ietf.org/minutes/2010-11-10-iaoc-minutes.txt.
The MTGVENUE working group is the forum where the IETF community can
discuss and agree on what should go into the policies, the selection
process, and the detailed criteria going forward. All criteria and all
other aspects of the process are open for discussion. The purpose of
the working group is to produce a community consensus document(s) that
help drive the meeting selection process in a manner that the
community is comfortable with.
The working group shall produce guidance on two areas:
1. A specification of the geographic IETF meeting policy, currently
described as the "1-1-1-*" policy. The policy going forward is up to
the working group.
2. A specification that describes the detailed meeting venue selection
process and criteria, the contents of which are also up to the working
group.
The specification(s) are expected to be Best Current Practice (BCP)
documents. The specifications are expected to provide clear guidance
to meeting selections, be implementable in our operating environment,
and take into account the needs of the highly diverse IETF community.
Milestones:
Mar 2016 - Initial individual draft on venue selection process and
criteria
Jul 2016 - Initial individual draft on IETF meeting geographic
distribution policy
Nov 2016 - Submission of the final working group draft on IETF meeting
geographic distribution policy to the IESG
Feb 2017 - Submission of the final working group draft on venue
selection process and criteria to the IESG