On Sat, 19 Jan 2002, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
If we were to get people to travel into the meeting on
Saturday and then start the meeting on Sunday, and end
on Thursday late afternoon (i.e. no Friday meetings),
then most of us will only have to be away for one weekend.
I have a
W.r.t. the claims about weekends being spoiled for those
traveling in from different continents, I would observe that
the way we schedule things now basically means that many
of those travelers get 2 weekends (at least partially)
taken away from their friends/families.
If we were to get people to
At 10:34 PM 1/18/2002 +, Lloyd Wood wrote:
>Including the decades of research into circadian rhythms and jetlag
>that you have somehow overlooked. The effect depends on the direction.
not overlooked at all. actual reactions to direction show pretty wide
variance between and within individua
At 04:39 PM 1/18/2002 +, Jon Crowcroft wrote:
>I have a feeling we are going to have t think
>VERY hard about the entire schedule for the 54th meeting oin
>Yokohama given 80% of folks there wil be on severe sleep
>deprivation...
From the western US, Europe is as good/bad as Japan for time
d
> I have a feeling we are going to have t think
> VERY hard about the entire schedule for the 54th meeting oin
> Yokohama given 80% of folks there wil be on severe sleep
> deprivation...
i know the japanese are said to be workaholic. but will they
be more tired than the 20% of us who fly?
ra
I have a feeling we are going to have t think
VERY hard about the entire schedule for the 54th meeting oin
Yokohama given 80% of folks there wil be on severe sleep
deprivation...
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dave Crocker typed:
>>At 10:02 AM 1/18/2002 -0500, Scott Brim wrote:
>>>Having on
--On Thursday, January 17, 2002 07:03:21 PM -0500 Ran Atkinson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Doing something on Sunday might create more options. Quite separately,
> it was true in the past that IETF would have one or more morning plenary
> meetings (which could be attempted again).
> - Rec
At 10:02 AM 1/18/2002 -0500, Scott Brim wrote:
>Having one of them on Sunday doesn't work because it takes a couple days
>for the issues to become clear.
IAB issues do not emerge over the course of a few days of IETF
meeting. IESG issues, however, sometimes do.
>Combining the Social with the
The IESG and IAB activities have become more important to the IETF at
large recently. They should be given more space in line with their
increased significance to the participants. Trying to cram it all into
one after-dinner meeting doesn't feel right anymore. I believe in 2
plenaries.
Having
some people don't live in the US but do have families
50% of us are
flying out saturday to be there for sunday all day meetings, flying
eastwards on friday, to get back mid day saturday, we lose 2 weekends.
compare this to intra-US flite to and from, i don';t think esxtending
friday is sustainab
> (at least for US-homed travellers)
Can we please keep in mind that half the attendees are not from the US?
My current IETF schedule is something like:
* Fly on Saturday (10-15 hours, 6-9 hour time change),
* Relatively quiet Sunday to recover,
* Meetings Monday-Friday morning,
* Catch a
Ran Atkinson writes:
| - Reception & Social might be merged together on Sunday evening.
The trend in vendor-sponsored social events lately has been so
abysmally awful that even working group meetings are less tedious,
so I fully support this suggestion for getting the Tuesday night
event
On Thursday, January 17, 2002, at 02:04 , Jeffrey Altman wrote:
> I find that in order to get better airline rates I am forced to travel
> into town on Saturday. So I'm in town on Sunday ...
> So maybe doing more on Sunday would be a possibility.
I believe that (at least for US-homed travellers
13 matches
Mail list logo