Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?

[Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis at neustar.biz>]

At 15:51 -0400 7/30/07, Matt Pounsett wrote:

> I was talking to a couple of people this week about what I consider to be a
> related issue: the fact that for the two or three wg meetings I'm interested
> in, there's little point in me being at the meeting for a whole week.

I can relate, I left Chicago on Tuesday.

> What about holding two or three meetings smaller meetings a year for each
> area, and then just one big meeting for the full IETF?  That would bring
> down the cost of the individual area meetings and therefore the admission
> fee, make them smaller and therefore capable of fitting into a wider range
> of hotels, and would likely result in fewer nights of hotel stay for a lot
> of people.

This idea has been tossed around before.  The rationale for 
maintaining large meetings, all under "one roof" has been to maintain 
coherency across all of the areas.  I was told that there have been 
times in some other standards bodies where one area will develop a 
standard that is completely incompatible with a standard developed by 
another area.  ("I was told" meaning that I have forgotten  all the 
particulars of the story by now.)  While all we should need is the 
IESG to be present together, by the time you count up the areas and 
weeks in a year and the ability of the IESG to travel...we just keep 
up having our large conventions.

Take a look at this for an extreme counter example:
   http://www.itu.int/events/monthlyagenda.asp?lang=en
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

Think glocally.  Act confused.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf