IETF-99 mtgvenue minutes
Session 2017-07-19 1520-1650: Karlin I/II - Audio stream - mtgvenue chatroom
Meeting Venue (mtgvenue) Working Group Minutes
IETF 99, Prague
1520 - 1650 Wednesday, July 19, 2017. Room: Karlin I/II
Notes thanks to Avri Doria. Thanks also to Barry Leiba for being Jabber scribe.
1520 Meeting Start
mtgvenue status update (Chairs, 10)
IETF Plenary Meeting Venue Selection (Eliot, 50)
Issue List: https://github.com/elear/mtgvenue/issues
issue 6 closed
issue 15 was a misunderstanding closed with no change
issue 18 hold that one for WGLC
Issue 22 no change
Issue 23 no change (i.e. not to add text for issue)
No one spoke
Issue to be closed in GitHub
2 open issues:
issue 20: IAOC references should be IASA. Text prepared for replacement. no objections on list.
took all Brian's recommended changes
except: reference to mtg Committees as IASA subcommittee inaccurate, change not made
no one had concerns
new issue: travel barriers issue
(including visa requirements because of SF issue)
Is text accurate.
Because of double negative, text matches what happened, nonetheless text needs changing
Text confuses people
Question of attaching a numeric value.
Point: meeting was moved because of insecurity, not because people could not travel.
Question of overwhelming majority does this take in uncertainty?
Bob Hinden: Moved to reduce risk of a successful meeting. no one knows what the policy will be at the time, yet it seemed possible. no one knew, and the cost of moving early factored in.
could the current words have justified the change?
Driven by action in the real world.
Leslie Daigle: The work for evaluating at a point in time. this set of criteria does not speak to the question of when it is a good idea to change.
wording ok for meeting selections but not for venue changes.
Eliot: 2 problems with existing
- double negatives confuse people
- impede should be impeded or discouraged
Re Late changes:
this text appears fine
Text is blurry enough to allow the decision that was made and may allow other changes as well
how does one measure overwhelming and significant?
Currently late changes discussed when a meeting must be moved, not one when it may be.
Questions: does the ability to bring computer count as an additional item. Seen as being included in travel barrier, inability to travel.
construe travel barriers broadly
Perhaps add some consideration on travel barriers
All criteria feed into ability to hold successful meeting
Look at adding another criterion
Define travel barriers - things that persuade people to not want to come
Travel barriers can change over time.
will open up GitHub issue or two.
Eliot will update, the chairs will do a WGLC
Ask Laura AMS to do sanity scrub of document with/after WGLC
hoping to progress to publication requests in next 4-6 weeks
High level guidance for the meeting policy of the IETF (Suresh, 10)
some small items
believes document is ready for WGLC
no objections to last call
current rev is the one going
IETF Meeting Network and Other Technical Requirements (Jordi, 10)
Believe existing guidelines (at https://iaoc.ietf.org/ietf-network-requirements.html) were based on -00 version of this draft
Not specific, but close enough for technical review
Request to become WG item
Is this doc useful at survey time or later?
Bottom line - this is important for us to have written
Q: how frequently do requirements change
A: base requirements stable but evolve - substantive change every 3 years. What may change more often are technical specific details, such as types of wiring, how it is setup, etc.
Useful to go through IETF process on baseline.
Should be easy to access - more than just as one RFC
Can this be used as RFP, making it a RFC may be too heavy weight
It should not nail down specific tech - it changes
should not be included in contract as that needs tailoring.
- not in charter. new charter?
if this becomes a requirement then it goes too far
Should the group ask a for a charter change?
'Does this need the efforts of a whole working group; or the NOC
Show of hands in people interested - very few
AD not a recharter - just an edit of a milestone
Chair: will post summary of discussion to list, ask who wants to work on it and whether they are willing to work with Jordi to do it.
no other business.