Re: Getting Taipei remote participants' input

Brian Rosen <br@brianrosen.net> Sun, 27 November 2011 19:50 UTC

Return-Path: <br@brianrosen.net>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35AB521F8CE3 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Nov 2011 11:50:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -99.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_64=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ejx1QXEi2DxO for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Nov 2011 11:50:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from barmail4.idig.net (barmail4.idig.net [64.34.111.235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 741F921F8C58 for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Nov 2011 11:50:48 -0800 (PST)
X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1322423447-011a9f08ff276e20001-JRdzcT
Received: from wwh1.winweblinux.com (wwh1.winweblinux.com [76.74.186.184]) by barmail4.idig.net with ESMTP id q02LsbDzXmY19CoT; Sun, 27 Nov 2011 11:50:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: br@brianrosen.net
X-Barracuda-Apparent-Source-IP: 76.74.186.184
Received: from cpe-98-148-118-147.socal.res.rr.com ([98.148.118.147] helo=[192.168.0.19]) by wwh1.winweblinux.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <br@brianrosen.net>) id 1RUkkR-0002nT-NW; Sun, 27 Nov 2011 11:50:47 -0800
Subject: Re: Getting Taipei remote participants' input
X-Barracuda-BBL-IP: 98.148.118.147
X-Barracuda-RBL-IP: 98.148.118.147
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1)
X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: Getting Taipei remote participants' input
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Brian Rosen <br@brianrosen.net>
In-Reply-To: <4ECFF5CA.4000903@bbiw.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 14:50:42 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1D464BDE-41EB-4A47-98A9-A648C026F130@brianrosen.net>
References: <47A5416C-33BF-44FB-B01B-D1FE59808AAD@vpnc.org> <CAC4RtVCdULyZ=-gp_tThMhwGYcMt81J32DUG0+NLHjP+26vF2A@mail.gmail.com> <4ECD1254.9010901@bbiw.net> <2247A63F-FF4C-43C4-AE16-6884B44C4A29@brianrosen.net> <4ECD21A1.5020003@bbiw.net> <C8429466-0E82-4C30-B5F0-FBB13E641130@brianrosen.net> <4ECD2B41.5090702@bbiw.net> <4ECD468D.80402@unina.it> <4ECFF5CA.4000903@bbiw.net>
To: Dave CROCKER <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
X-Barracuda-Connect: wwh1.winweblinux.com[76.74.186.184]
X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1322423447
X-Barracuda-URL: http://64.34.111.235:8000/cgi-mod/mark.cgi
X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.00
X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.00 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.5 tests=
X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.2.81474 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
Cc: IETF WG chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/wgchairs>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 19:50:49 -0000

People worry about RFID, but I like it because it's a faster read.  Bar code is less controversial (and already there).  Tablet+wifi means it's only a battery lifetime issue.  If we could have aggressive enough battery management, perhaps we could get through the day.

All  I think you want is a reader and a visible queue.  The queue just tells you that the reader read correctly and has you in the queue.

The chair gets to change the queue, but that ought to be rare and probably just pick the next person in queue.  Remote participants simply imitate the reader action.

For extra credit, monitor the jabber room.  Look for <mic> and put them in queue.

Brian

On Nov 25, 2011, at 3:08 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:

> 
> 
> On 11/23/2011 11:16 AM, Simon Pietro Romano wrote:
>> Hi Dave,
>> 
>>> If you mean aggregating the set of folk at all the mics and taking them in the
>>> strict order of their coming to the (single) queue, that doesn't work on
>>> average, unless the queue is tiny. The chair can't keep track of who arrived
>>> to the queue and when.
>> 
>> I personally like Brian's idea, and think the all thing might work smoothly if
>> you make use of a tool capable to automatically collect and moderate floor
>> requests, to be put in a (virtual) single queue. What I'm thinking of is RFIDs
>> triggering BFCP (Binary Floor Control Protocol) requests,
> 
> 
> An interesting challenge, for Paul's current contract, is to find a way to navigate between what the community wants, versus what is practical.  The fact that we are a group of engineers means that we tend to try to solve the problem, before agreeing on what problem we want to solve...
> 
> Suggestions like the above sound appealing.  Unfortunately, they are far beyond current products and making them useful is considerably more difficult than the suggestions imply.  That doesn't mean they should be ignored, but we need to be careful about slipping into the assumption that merely citing a bit of technology means that an issue is resolved.
> 
> We had an experiment with RFIDs.  It was awkward, at best.  In addition, it was extremely limited.  Only the person standing right next to the microphone could be identified.  For example, this means that it would not have been useful for identifying when someone /enters/ the queue.  Too far away.
> 
> So if folks are going to attempt to define the technical solution, at least please try to indicate how it would work throughout the requirement.
> 
> In the case of queue management, we have at least entering the queue, position in the queue, and the chair's control of the queue.  No doubt, there's even more complexity than that.  For example, there's "noise" such as someone walking by the queue but not entering it...
> 
> d/
> -- 
> 
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net