Subject: [sidr] Date and type of the next (end of June/early July) interim

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 16:47:30 +0100

Dear WG members,
The WG needs to decide about the date and type of the next interim 
(after June 6th). The earlier proposal stated June 29th. Are people 
happy with this date or do they want to propose an alternative? Note 
that we are more flexible this time, because this is not tied to any 
other industry event.

We also need to decide on whether this should be a physical interim with 
remote participants or fully virtual interim (e.g. everybody is using 
WebEx or something similar).

Please reply to this message, sending your comments to the mailing list 
or directly to chairs ([email-masked]).

Best Regards,
Alexey, on behalf of SIDR chairs.

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 16:47:14 +0900

alexey,

> happy with this date or do they want to propose an alternative?

i doubt i would have all homework from 6 june done by the 29th.  of
course, i might be lucky and have none :)  and, of course i can not
speak for matt, who does the heavy lifting.

if 6 june turns out to leave a lot to discuss that warrants the
bandwidth, i'll fly to wherever for the 29th.  otherwise, i'll probably
skype-out to the webex's pstn gateway.

randy

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 10:47:49 +0100

Hi Randy,

> speak for matt, who does the heavy lifting.

Would you prefer a later date then, e.g. shortly after July 4th?

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 19:22:07 +0900

good evening alexey,

> Would you prefer a later date then, e.g. shortly after July 4th?

janog is 4-6 july, so we would be into the following week, the week of
the 9th [0].  and then we've just moved the short stick to the time to
the pre-ietf meeting, which i have marked as 27.7.

so, if i had to call it now, i would say 29.6 virtual.  i would asume it
would be short, except we may not get as much done as we would like in
the post-nanog van meeting in ten or so days.

randy

[0] - the calendar many of us use to avoid ops meetings conficts can be
      found at http://ws.edu.isoc.org/calendar/

---

From: Samuel Weiler <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 11:38:35 -0400 (EDT)

> that we are more flexible this time, because this is not tied to any 

I presently oppose having interims [1], but in case the WG decides to 
have one anyway...

My preference is for earlier that week, particularly Tuesday or 
Wednesday, 26-27 June.  Following up on Randy's suggestion, the week 
of 9 July is also fine, with a slight preference for Tuesday-Thursday. 
I had said back in March that I would not be available on 29 June [2] 
-- there's a chance that could change, but I'd still rather pick a day 
that I can commit to, like the Tuesday or Wednesday.

> We also need to decide on whether this should be a physical interim 
> with remote participants or fully virtual interim (e.g. everybody is 
> using WebEx or something similar).

I don't care.  I've previously suggested that we have an all-virtual 
meeting as a forcing function on the technical issues[2], but many of 
those issues involve getting audio to/from the room with many people 
in it, so an all-virtual meeting may not all that useful as a forcing 
function.

-- Sam

[1] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sidr/current/msg04559.html

[2] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sidr/current/msg04268.html

---

From: "Murphy, Sandra" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 21:07:10 +0000

Not many people  have commented on Alexey's message.

IETF process mandates that a face-face meeting be announced four week ahead, which is Friday 1 Jun, if we stay with face-face on 29 Jun.

The subsequent meeting was proposed for 27 Jul, so keep that in mind as well.

--Sandy
________________________________________
From: [email-masked] [[email-masked]] on behalf of Alexey Melnikov [[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 11:47 AM
To: sidr wg
Subject: [sidr] Date and type of the next (end of June/early July) interim

Dear WG members,

Best Regards,

_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr

---

From: "Roque Gagliano (rogaglia)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 13:38:54 +0000

Hi Alexey,

I would like to propose to have a test for a virtual-only meeting. 

I understand that we want to keep interims very dynamic in a whiteboard style. But, having participated remotely for a couple of hours in the previous meeting, this is very hard for remote participants (internal conversations, been able to jump into the flow, presenting, etc.)

So, having a virtual-only meeting will be different as you normally requires more preparation work and moderators needs to be more active to make sure we get the work done.

Roque

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 20:17:00 +0100

On 25/05/2012 16:47, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> Please reply to this message, sending your comments to the mailing 
> list or directly to chairs ([email-masked]).
There weren't that many replies to this message. Most of the people who 
replied were either happy with the June 29th date or didn't want to have 
an interim around June 29th at all. Based on feedback from people who 
replied (some of them replied privately), SIDR chairs decided to 
tentatively book a fully virtual interim for a half of June 29th. Fully 
virtual interims (e.g. conference calls and/or jabber chats) require 2 
weeks prior notice to larger IETF community, so chairs will wait till 
after the interim on June 6th to decide whether there are enough issues 
to warrant having a virtual interim on June 29th.

Best Regards,
Alexey,
as a SIDR co-chair

P.S. There seems to be more interest in having a co-located interim just 
before the Vancouver IETF. We are still planning to have this one.