Thanks Vinayak. Let me add a few more points - On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Vinayak Hegde <vinay...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi John, > > My draft with some observations has some answers to your questions. Also > some answers inline. > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hegde-remote-hubs-india-01 > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 5:14 PM, John Leslie <j...@jlc.net> wrote: > >> Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.i...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > (1) WG champion: Having one or two WG champion at the Hub helped to set >> the >> > tone, go over the WG agenda in advance, answer questions and continue >> the >> > discussion after the WG meeting. >> >> What time commitment is expected? (I assume the expertise expected is >> for a single Working Group.) >> > > Not much. If you are alone with few people. Only time needed to attend the > WG meeting > and maybe some time to send out invites. The barrier (effort) for > participation is quite low. > [Dhruv]: yes, the time commitment was quite less. The champion was someone who follows the WG discussions and preferably has a draft or two in the WG. > > >> > (2) Discussions/Hot-Topics: Most participants can join remotely on their >> > own from home/work. We need to make it worthwhile for someone to >> travel to >> > the Hub, so it is important that we make sure that the hub can offer >> > something more.... This could be a lively discussion, networking, side >> > meetings on some HOT technology, tutorial etc. >> >> What's your experience with folks who need to follow more than one >> stream? >> (I have had to remain near-home in order to cover everything I need to. >> Perhaps an academic setting could maintain 8 rooms; but essentially no >> workplace can do that.) >> > > This works best when people are on the same academic campus or there is a > cluster > of offices in IT parks nearby. You can pick and choose sessions based on > your expertise > and specific interests in your remote group (mostly it will be areas like > Routing or Apps). > or it could be general like a Tech Plenary. > [Dhruv]: Yes, maintaining 8 rooms for parallel tracks for the whole week is very hard. So the hub agenda has to be a subset and based on the majority of the participant's interests, usually that ends up as an area specific cluster. > > >> > (3) Agenda - getting the IETF agenda early, would help a lot in making >> the >> > sub-set agenda for the hub based on interest/timezone etc. >> >> What do you mean, early? Alia certainly has access to _premature_ >> agendas; >> but I'm not sure they'd be helpful. And, of course, agendas _do_ change >> even >> after the start of an IETF week... >> > > I think he was talking about WG areas but these are subject to change as > well. > [Dhruv]: The activity of making a subset agenda based on the interests and then finding WG champions who will attend the hub, etc cannot be started until we have an agenda. So as soon as IETF publishes a draft agenda, we can start Hub agenda planning. I understand the agenda can never be perfect and always subject to change, in spite of that IMHO having a draft agenda early would help. Regards, Dhruv > > Thanks > Vinayak >
_______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html. https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vmeet
