t my thoughts -- and I am still not recovered enough that I
am sure I'll believe them at the end of the week.
john
-Original Message-
From: John C Klensin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 9:31 PM
Subject: Re: survey on Friday IETF sessions
...
An additiona
IMPORTANT! This message has been blind-carbon-copied to you.
Do not reply-to-all or forward it without the author's
permission.
An additional thought about Friday meetings that the survey
doesn't capture...
Whether the problem is "Friday" or "after four days", our
meetings are intense enough t
Bill Manning writes:
> perhaps the reason there has not been more participation in your survey is
> associated w/ the following:
> "A problem occurred in a Python script. Here is the sequence of
> function calls leading up to the error, in the order they occurred."
> this error could be due to th
--On 22. juli 2004 10:55 -0700 Aaron Falk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Perhaps we should raise the bar on what it takes to get a slot at the
IETF meeting. For example, try to come up with some objective criteria
for what deserves a 1hr slot, 2hrs, multiple, etc. This might even
nudge groups into
Simon Leinen wrote:
this error could be due to the fact that I did not attend Seoul but
did attned MPLS and will attend SD. [...]
maybe not - I also got such an error, although I did attend both
IETF58 and 59. Looks like a file permission problem.
It was a file permission problem, caused b
perhaps the reason there has not been more participation in your survey is
associated w/ the following:
"A problem occurred in a Python script. Here is the sequence of function calls leading
up to the error, in the order they occurred."
this error could be due to the fact that I did not attend
--On Thursday, July 22, 2004 10:55 AM -0700 Aaron Falk
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
BTW, regarding the survey: there's only been 80 responses so
far. My take is that people don't care about the issue enough
to voice their opinion.
I can't guess at the percentages, but at least a few people (who
At 10:55 AM 07/22/04 -0700, Aaron Falk wrote:
Perhaps we should raise the bar on what it takes to get a slot at the IETF
meeting. For example, try to come up with some objective criteria for
what deserves a 1hr slot, 2hrs, multiple, etc. This might even nudge
groups into making some additiona
On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 10:55:51AM -0700, Aaron Falk wrote:
>
> BTW, regarding the survey: there's only been 80 responses so far. My
> take is that people don't care about the issue enough to voice their
> opinion.
Or maybe that 5% of a typical attendance is a good sample of the more
active pe
On Jul 22, 2004, at 6:30 AM, Michael Richardson wrote:
I think it comes back to:
a) some groups probably shouldn't meet as often
b) some groups perhaps shouldn't exist at all
c) some groups need 6-10 hours of continuous face-time in which
they
can actually get things done. We
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> "Tim" == Tim Chown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> For me, it is rare to have meals that are not meetings of some
>> sort. And I often have face-to-face editing sessions on IETF
>> business or offline-but-topical discussions with customers and
On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 05:07:25PM -0700, Fred Baker wrote:
> At 09:51 PM 07/21/04 +0200, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> >New survey question: How many lunches and dinners did you have at the last
> >IETF that were NOT meetings?
>
> For me, it is rare to have meals that are not meetings of
At 09:51 PM 07/21/04 +0200, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
New survey question: How many lunches and dinners did you have at the last
IETF that were NOT meetings?
For me, it is rare to have meals that are not meetings of some sort. And I
often have face-to-face editing sessions on IETF busine
On 21-jul-04, at 21:51, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
2. Move away from the session/break/session model. So rather than let
the
rooms be empty for 1.5 hours during the lunch and dinner breaks,
schedule
sessions more or less continuously. People who want to eat are no
worse
off, as they still ge
--On 21. juli 2004 21:13 +0200 Iljitsch van Beijnum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 21-jul-04, at 6:20, Aaron Falk wrote:
In the interest of creating a more informed discussion,
we've put together a short questionnaire to gather some data on
attending meetings from IETF participants.
Ok, that's gr
On 21-jul-04, at 6:20, Aaron Falk wrote:
In the interest of creating a more informed discussion,
we've put together a short questionnaire to gather some data on
attending meetings from IETF participants.
Ok, that's great of course, but I have two different suggestions:
1. Get a better feel for whic
One of the issues we seem to be running into is an increased number of
conflicts in meeting slots at IETF meetings. For instance, two years
ago the meeting slots predominantly were used for 6-7 meetings, whereas
the agenda for the upcoming meeting has no slot except for Friday
without 7-8 meetings
17 matches
Mail list logo
