Richard, all: There are generally two approaches for discussions that
involve chartering a working group or rechartering one. (This is based on
my impressions, of course, so any errors are mine.) One way to do this is
to have individual speaking slots where interested folks make a pitch on
specific work items that will eventually be related to the (re)charter,
plus some time for an open discussion. The second way to do this ---
perhaps this way makes more sense for a recharter than an initial BOF that
seeks to charter and establish a WG --- is to have one narrator drive the
reasons for (re)chartering, and have an open discussion.
Right now, while the latter seems to make sense from my perspective, I
don't know what the thoughts of my co-chair or the AD are. Jan, Martin,
and I will huddle and try to figure out how to provide some order to the
hour-long discussion slot we have. Once we have clarity among the three of
us, we can provide further guidance. In the meantime, any thoughts you or
others may have on how to shape up the hour-long charter slot, please post
to the list.
Thanks,
- vijay
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 9:59 AM Y. Richard Yang wrote:
> Hi Vijay,
>
> Making a single bulk slot instead of many small presentations for the
> discussion makes a lot of sense. It is a good agenda.
>
> Richard
>
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:54 AM Vijay Gurbani
> wrote:
>
>> All: The draft agenda is at [1]. Please note that requests for
>> presentations of non-WG items were not honored since we will like to
>> provide the bulk of the second hour to the recharter discussion.
>>
>> Please let Jan and me know of any changes to the agenda. Thanks.
>>
>> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/108/materials/agenda-108-alto-00
>> ___
>> alto mailing list
>> alto@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> =
> | Y. Richard Yang|
> | Professor of Computer Science |
> | http://www.cs.yale.edu/~yry/|
> =
>
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
