I think this is a really, really, really bad idea. This is my first IETF.
I had read all the drafts of what interested me before going here. I
thought that was enough. Boy was I wrong. I am now also subscribed to the
mailiglists...
However, I have been to several of the other gatherings of the same people
(mostly RIPE) and I thought I was somewhat prepeared for what this woudl
be like. I wasn't. This was unlike anything I have seen so far. I have
learnt alot and I have really enjoyed following the discussions and
meeting the people.
This was my first IETF but hopefully not the last. I
have learnt some of how the IETF works. I will be following the
mailinglist discussions, and maybe I can contribute something. Maybe I
oneday in the future can contribute something at a meeting. I hope so.
I don't think that this "awakening" should be limited to people that have
been active on mailinglists. It's not the same thing, and it will "scare"
people off. I really hope that instead the logistical problems can be
overcome.
- kurtis -
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Scott Brim wrote:
> Given that the overcrowding at this IETF was the worst ever, and really
> interfered with work, not to mention the social event ...
>
> Building on a previous suggestion:
>
> * When you register for the IETF, you specify which WGs you are
> interested in in priority order.
>
> * Simultaneously WG Chairs submit lists of people who are active. This
> includes chairs for new WGs and BOFs.
>
> * The agenda and room assignments coalesce based in part on expected
> attendance -- this probably continues to require hand-crafting.
>
> * Software magically takes registrant WG preferences and fills rooms,
> giving priority to those who have been active (purely according to WG
> chairs). Once a room is full no one is added. OK, this is the
> cruddiest part, but leave the details for now.
>
> * People receive mail saying which WGs they have been granted access to.
> They can apply for more, but they probably won't get in, which means
> there is a strong incentive to have specific reasons why they want to
> go to the IETF when they register in the first place.
>
> * When they come to the IETF their packets contain not only a receipt
> (the point being that the packets are already individualized) but an
> authenticated (anything, a little ink stamp, even) schedule, which
> they have to show at the meeting room door to get in the room.
>
> * "Standby" entry is allowed if there are seats not taken 5 minutes
> before the meeting starts.
>
>
> Details can be explored based on what you think of this in principle.
>
> ...Scott
>
