[dccp] Re: is this a problem?

[Aaron Falk <falk@isi.edu>]

Al-

Thanks for the info.  I'll wait until after the TSV "massaging" of the
agenda before I squawk to the Secretariat.  Please keep in mind that,
especially since we are planning a design review, it is a particularly
good thing to have dccp wg attendance by folks involved in multimedia
transport and applications.

--aaron

Allison Mankin wrote:
> Hi, Aaron,
> 
> Well, it'll prevent both ADs from attending...but TSV does an area
> track and we're going to reorganize the TSV agenda quite a bit.
> We haven't done it yet because there're a couple requests for 
> meetings still to come in.  It should happen next day or so.
> 
> Al
> 
> > 
> > WEDNESDAY, July 16, 2003
> > 0800-1700 IETF Registration -
> > 0800-0900 Continental Breakfast -
> > 0900-1130 Morning Sessions
> > INT     mip6     Mobility for IPv6 BOF
> >         mipshop  MIPv6 Signaling and Handoff Optimization BOF
> > OPS     multi6   Site Multihoming in IPv6 WG
> > SUB     ccamp    Common Control and Measurement Plane WG
> > TSV     dccp     Datagram Congestion Control Protocol WG
> > TSV     sip      Session Initiation Protocol WG
> > 
> > ===============================================
> > 
> > The current draft schedule has sip in the same slot as dccp.  Keeping
> > in mind that resolving schedule conflicts is a very difficult task for
> > the Secretariat, is this a _major_ problem (i.e., will it prevent
> > active wg members from attending)?
> > 
> > --aaron
> > 
> > PS. Don't book travel based on the schedule below.  It will almost
> > definitely change.
> > 
_______________________________________________
dccp IETF mailing list: dccp@ietf.org
list info:  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dccp
wg charter: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/dccp-charter.html