Re: Registration for remote participation

No statistics about this, but there are people who don’t have datatracker 
credentials.

You can do most things, including submitting drafts without datatracker 
credentials.

But as yet another option it works fine.

Yoav

On 24 May 2017, at 17:41, Spencer Dawkins at IETF 
<spencerdawkins(_dot_)ietf(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:

> I didn't see any response to Eliot's suggestion to use datatracker 
> credentials for registration, so that (1) we have links to information that 
> has been previously provided, and (2) we'd have roughly the same level of 
> verification that we have for anyone who's using the datatracker now.
>
> What are the downsides? I guess Meetecho would need to handle IETF 
> differently from other customers (who, regrettably, don't use datatracker)? 
> Are there others?
>
> Spencer
>
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 2:52 AM, Eliot Lear <lear(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com 
> <mailto:lear(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com>> wrote:
>
>
> On 5/10/17 8:04 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> > IETF Chair <chair(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org <mailto:chair(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>> 
> > wrote:
> >     > Title
> >     > First / Given Name*
> >     > Last / Family Name*
> >     > Company / Organization
> >     > ISO 3166 Country of Residence*
> >     > Email*
> >     > Gender
> >     > Have you attended an IETF meeting in person before?
> >     > Have you attended an IETF meeting remotely before?
> >
> >     > Upon registering, participants would be issued a registration ID, just
> >     > as they are today.
> >
> > Are we validating the email address in some way?
> > If we are not, I don't see the point of the *-required in any of those 
> > places.
> Regardless of motivation here, if the tools team were to use our
> ietf.org <http://ietf.org/> logins for registration one of the benefits of 
> that would be
> that many fields could be filled in for us, albeit editable (some of us
> need that for tee shirt size, regrettably),  both for in person and
> remote participation.
>
> There is a downside: the secretariat would have to secure that
> information.  Personally I think we should offer that as an option as an
> exercise to demonstrate how privacy can be done properly, so that we are
> eating our own dog food.  The minimum, though, would be a validated IETF
> account.  I don't think that's a high bar.
>
> Eliot

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP