This wikipage addresses some of the operational aspects you mention: http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/group/wgchairs/wiki/RemoteParticipation
I would think that could be augmented to address some of the concerns you raised. Mary. On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Thomas Narten <nar...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > It is good to document what we have been doing. But the text seems to > focus on technology and tools... > > IMO, what is missing is operational Best Practices. We seem to be > lacking them (are any written down?) And we don't follow them > consistently, especially from one WG to another. Many of the problems > I see with remote participation facilties have to do not with the > technology per se, but with lack of proper training and advance > testing. I get the general sense that getting the remote stuff to work > is a volunteer effort where each person tries it themselves with no > checklist of obvious things to do in advance, and no recourse if no > one in the room can get something working. > > E.g., I was at an interim meeting last fall, where it looked like when > the meeting started, that was the the first that folk actually looked > at the facilities in the room (phone, microphones, etc.) to see how > best to allow remote participants to speak. The quick conclusion was > "can't be done". This should have been worked out (and tested) in > advance, not at the start of the meeting. > > Thomas >
