On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 03:15:32PM -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
plans. If we are inclined toward shifting toward more interim
meetings rather than emphasizing asynchronous email
communication, we should ask ourselves about the risks of
thereby shifting the profiles of the participants and the
possible consequences of doing that.
One of the things I have wondered about, and in keeping with some
remarks in the plenary last night, I have been wondering why we do
virtual interim meetings as _meetings_.
Sometimes, rapid-fire real time discussion is needed to sort out a
complicated problem. But in at least some cases (I'm sure I myself am
guilty of this), the meeting amounts to a forcing function to cause
work. If one does that all virtually, then everyone needs to have the
enjoyment of time-shifting and jetlag without the benefit of
in-person-discussion in more casual ways (hallways, dinner, whatever).
Maybe what we need is not more virtual interims, but more time boxes.
This would do nothing for controversy that needs rapid interaction,
but it might meet the test of "faster progress".
One way to do that would be to set document sprint dates in advance,
and for chairs to reserve discussion of this or that other topic at
ome time. Have any WGs tried this recently?