Re: Multicast channels at the 52nd IETF

[Lloyd Wood <l.wood at eim.surrey.ac.uk>]

On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Harald Alvestrand wrote:

> --On tirsdag, oktober 23, 2001 00:01:53 -0400 Edward Lewis 
> <lewis at tislabs.com> wrote:
> 
> > What is the chance that the number of multicast channels will increase
> > during the next IETF meeting?  I am hearing that international travel will
> > be problematic for the time being.
> >
> > What are the barriers to increasing from the current two channels?
> 
> Volunteers, equipment, time and money.
> 
> The main problem is evaluating the cost/benefit; I think we have had 
> relatively few listeners on the multicast channels at the last few IETFs.
> Reports from people who feel that they have gained real benefit from remote 
> participation would be appreciated; happy customers means that we are more 
> likely to invest more effort in the service.

I think remote participation in live WG meets isn't a worthwhile goal,
given cost and difficulties of interactive networking (never mind
timezones); encouraging it when more than half the people in a WG
meeting have their faces buried in a laptop and are tapping away at
wireless access anyway is merely ironic.

If you really want to increase participation, start by turning off
wireless networking entirely and telling everyone who is actually
there to pay attention. Including the people showing slides; at least
with printed acetate technology you don't have people stopping to
answer their Instant Messages.

Better imo to simply record, digitise and upload all sessions so that
at least those who couldn't attend could find out what happened when
convenient and then influence events on the relevant mailing lists
afterwards.

(Isn't it reasonable to assume that at least one attendee to every
session owns a video camera?)

L.

would listen to audio recordings of IESG meetings and IETF
teleconferences. imagines they're pretty much like parts of Radio 4.

<L.Wood at surrey.ac.uk>PGP<http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/>