On Dec 6, 2011, at 3:33 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
> The practical tradeoff for virtual meetings is starting at 6am Pacific or 7am
> Pacific. At that, you get at most a two-hour window for the meeting.
Well, it often is a question of the specific group. The RSOC meets at 6:00 AM
in New Zealand.
On 12/6/2011 2:43 PM, Bob Hinden wrote:
The only other alternative, is to spread the pain around so that a series of
meetings are held at different times. That way the people in one region are
not always inconvenienced. Everyone has a meeting in the middle of the night
once every three mee
On Dec 6, 2011, at 2:33 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>
>
> On 12/6/2011 11:02 AM, Fred Baker wrote:
>> ll of them. It's*Really*Hard* to find a time when it is daylight in Asia,
>> Europe, and North America
>
>
> Given that 7am Pacific is midnight in Tokyo, yeah, it's a bit difficult...
>
> The
On 12/6/2011 11:02 AM, Fred Baker wrote:
ll of them. It's*Really*Hard* to find a time when it is daylight in Asia,
Europe, and North America
Given that 7am Pacific is midnight in Tokyo, yeah, it's a bit difficult...
The practical tradeoff for virtual meetings is starting at 6am Pacific o
On Dec 6, 2011, at 7:48 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
> Note well : We could, today, do a really phenomenal technical job
> hosting virtual meetings with telepresence. The technology exists,
> today. The question is, what can we afford and what fits well with our
> operations.
>
> Even if (say) Po
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 11:16 PM, Marshall Eubanks
wrote:
> We are currently setting up an entirely virtual interim for MBONED,
> probably for early January.
One thing I have pushed for in the purely virtual interims is to have
several short meetings, rather than one long one.
This is driven by s
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 7:27 AM, John Leslie wrote:
> Marshall Eubanks wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
>>> On Dec 5, 2011, at 8:52 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>>
Next up: interim meetings. Some of the tools that we are talking
about for remote participation wil
> Wes Beebee presented on what is now RFC 6204. I would
> say that it partially worked; it was far from seamless.
I want to say a big thank you to Fred on this one. It was not easy to setup
nor was it easy to interact with the audience. However, I would say that I
achieved all of my objectives a
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
>> On Dec 5, 2011, at 8:52 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>
>>> Next up: interim meetings. Some of the tools that we are talking
>>> about for remote participation will also be useful for WG interim
>>> meetings. Some interim
We are currently setting up an entirely virtual interim for MBONED,
probably for early January.
Regards
Marshall
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
> On Dec 5, 2011, at 8:52 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> Next up: interim meetings. Some of the tools that we are talking about for
>>
On Dec 5, 2011, at 8:52 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> Next up: interim meetings. Some of the tools that we are talking about for
> remote participation will also be useful for WG interim meetings. Some
> interim meetings are face-to-face with remote participants, others are
> completely virtual. It
11 matches
Mail list logo
