No, fundamentally, WG sessions are not supposed to be opportunities to
present. They are supposed to be opportunities to use higher bandwidth
to resolve issues. Even virtual meetings are supposed to be for that goal.
Of the several presentations at the last meeting, most had no comments,
some had one or two comments (from me and Fabio if I recall, I ahve not
checked the minutes), and I think one got some good discussion.
I expect you know of multiple issues. I would not be surprised (and it
is normal and acceptable) if you discuss those issues with your
co-authors. Bring some of those issues to the list.
Side-note: I am not talking about the issues around the document
advancement. that is a different problem.
Yours,
Joel
On 3/10/2020 6:02 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote:
Many of the things that I believe folks would like to discuss are in charter.
Dino, I think you misunderstood my point.
I understood the point. But if people don’t get the opportunity to present,
then there isn’t much to discuss. If members want to discuss anything they feel
is important, they can always bring that up on the list. So there is nothing
special about a virtual meeting that would warrant discussion.
But if there are presenters, then we should have a virtual meeting.
I am looking to see discussion on the list to give me confidence that a virtual
session will be useful. I have been
It will be useful if there are presenters.
disappointed in the one-way nature of the last several working group meetings,
and do not wish to waste a virtual meeting on such.
It is less waste than having a physical meeting.
There was one-way nature in the last working group? Can you be more specific? I
saw discussion at the mic.
Dino
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
lisp@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
