idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-genarea-rps-reqs-04.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (May 7, 2012) is 4371 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group P. Hoffman 3 Internet-Draft VPN Consortium 4 Intended status: Informational May 7, 2012 5 Expires: November 8, 2012 7 Requirements for Remote Participation Services for the IETF 8 draft-ietf-genarea-rps-reqs-04 10 Abstract 12 The IETF has provided some tools for remote participation in its 13 activities for many years, and some IETF participants have also used 14 their own tools when they felt the need arise. The IETF now wishes 15 to support enhanced remote participation that is as seamless as 16 possible, improving the experience for the remote attendee without 17 degrading the experience for the people that are physically present. 18 Before deploying the new tools and services needed for this enhanced 19 remote participation, the requirements for such tools and services, 20 and the impacts they will make on the current procedures and 21 infrastructure, must be defined. This document is meant to be that 22 definition. 24 Status of this Memo 26 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 27 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 29 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 30 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 31 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 32 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 34 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 35 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 36 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 37 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 39 This Internet-Draft will expire on November 8, 2012. 41 Copyright Notice 43 Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 44 document authors. All rights reserved. 46 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 47 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 48 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 49 publication of this document. Please review these documents 50 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 51 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 52 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 53 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 54 described in the Simplified BSD License. 56 Table of Contents 58 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 59 1.1. Goals for an Improved RPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 60 1.2. About This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 61 2. Requirements for Supporting Remote Participation in 62 Regular IETF Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 63 2.1. Registration for Remote Participation . . . . . . . . . . 7 64 2.2. Instant Messaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 65 2.3. Audio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 66 2.3.1. Audio to Remote Attendees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 67 2.3.2. IM-to-Mic Relay of Comments from Remote Attendees . . 9 68 2.3.3. Audio for Presentations from Remote Attendees . . . . 10 69 2.3.4. Audio from Remote Attendees to the Room for 70 Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 71 2.4. Video . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 72 2.4.1. Video from the Room to Remote Attendees . . . . . . . 12 73 2.4.2. Video from Remote Attendees to the Room . . . . . . . 13 74 2.5. Slide Presentations and Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . 13 75 2.6. Shared Text Document Editing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 76 2.7. Archiving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 77 2.8. Polling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 78 2.9. Plenaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 79 2.10. Use by IETF Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 80 2.11. Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 81 2.11.1. Preparation for WG Chairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 82 2.11.2. Preparation for Remote Attendees . . . . . . . . . . . 17 83 3. Requirements for Supporting Remote Participation in 84 Interim Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 85 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 86 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 87 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 88 7. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 89 Appendix A. Background on IETF Remote Participation . . . . . . . 20 90 A.1. How the IETF Meets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 91 A.2. Technologies Currently Used at Regular IETF Meetings . . . 22 92 A.3. Locating the Meeting Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 93 A.3.1. Audio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 94 A.3.2. Instant Messaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 95 A.3.3. Slides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 96 A.4. Remote Participation at IETF Meetings . . . . . . . . . . 24 97 A.4.1. Remotely Speaking at the Mic . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 98 A.4.2. Remotely Presenting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 99 A.4.3. Floor Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 100 A.5. Remote Participation at IETF Interim WG Meetings . . . . . 28 101 A.5.1. Face-to-Face Interim Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 102 A.5.2. Virtual Interim Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 103 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 105 1. Introduction 107 There are two types of participants at the three-times-a-year IETF 108 meetings: the people who are physically at the meeting ("local 109 attendees") and people that are not physically at the meeting but are 110 following the meeting online ("remote attendees"). For more than a 111 decade, the IETF has tried to make it easier for remote attendees to 112 participate in its face-to-face meetings in a meaningful fashion by 113 employing various tools. 115 At the same time, many IETF Working Groups (WGs) have started to have 116 interim meetings that are scheduled between the regular IETF 117 meetings; these are briefly described in [RFC2418]. Some of these 118 interim meetings are face-to-face meetings with remote attendees, 119 while other interim meetings only take place over the Internet or on 120 the phone; the latter type of meeting is often called a "virtual 121 interim". There are also interim meetings that do not support remote 122 participation. 124 The IETF's current remote participation system ("RPS") for the 125 official three-times-a-year meetings ("regular IETF meetings") 126 consists of a real-time audio stream carried to remote attendees over 127 HTTP, textual instant messaging (IM) carried over Jabber, and slides 128 distributed on the IETF web site. Experimental support for two 129 integrated tools, WebEx and Meetecho, are used to sync the audio and 130 slides during the meeting, and also replay them in the proceedings. 131 Some WGs also employ ad-hoc tools such as Skype. For interim WG 132 meetings, the IETF provides access to WebEx. The IETF's leadership 133 regularly uses telephone, Jabber, and WebEx for the many meetings 134 that happen between the IETF meetings. Many meetings use a mixture 135 of tools, with each tool providing only part of the overall desired 136 functionality. A more detailed description of the current IETF RPS 137 can be found in Appendix A. 139 1.1. Goals for an Improved RPS 141 The IETF wants to improve the tools provided in the RPS for many 142 reasons. 144 o A better RPS would allow current remote IETF attendees to 145 participate in regular IETF meetings more effectively, and would 146 also allow more people to become remote IETF attendees. This in 147 turn would hopefully lead to better WG outcomes. There are many 148 people who are active in many WGs who rarely or never come to IETF 149 meetings; good RPS tools could allow some of these people to 150 contribute better during meetings. 152 o The improved RPS tools would also be used outside IETF meetings. 153 They would be available to WGs for interim meetings, both to allow 154 remote participation in face-to-face interims as well as to 155 facilitate virtual interims where none of the attendees are in the 156 same location. 158 o The plenary sessions of IETF meetings currently only allow remote 159 attendees to hear the speakers and read a real-time transcript. 160 Improved RPS tools would allow remote attendees to see the 161 speakers, to see the slides synchronized with the audio, and be 162 able to comment at the mics like people in the room. 164 o The IETF leadership (the IAB, IESG, IAOC, and probably others) 165 could use the new tools to help make their own meetings more 166 effective. 168 o There is a desire to better capture the contributions to the IETF 169 (as defined in [BCP78]) of remote attendees in the official record 170 of regular IETF and interim meetings. 172 The are many IETF-related activities that can be aided by remote 173 participation tools. The scenarios in which the RPS described in 174 this document is expected to be used are WG sessions at regular IETF 175 meetings, plenaries at regular IETF meetings, AD-sponsored lunch 176 meetings at regular IETF meetings, face-to-face interim WG meetings, 177 and IETF leadership meetings. 179 1.2. About This Document 181 The purpose of this document is to develop the requirements for the 182 IETF's RPS that enables enhanced remote participation in meeting 183 sessions. The RPS described in this document might augment and/or 184 replace the current set of IETF RPS tools. The intention is to 185 improve as much as possible of the experience of remote attendees in 186 meetings while not significantly affecting the experiences of local 187 attendees and WG chairs. 189 This document differentiates between requirements that have higher 190 and lower priorities. Higher-priority requirements are intended to 191 be delivered as soon as possible, but lower-priority requirements 192 might be delivered later. For example, a high-priority requirement 193 might be "remote attendees must be able to know which slide is being 194 discussed" and a related, lower-priority requirement might be "remote 195 attendees must be able to see the speaker pointing to the slide with 196 a laser pointer". The eventual tools will be rolled out based on the 197 priorities, making it likely that the community will learn more about 198 additional requirements for lower priority items before they are 199 deployed. 201 Note that some of the requirements in this document for particular 202 functionality may not be desired by all WG chairs. Different WG 203 chairs prefer to use different tools, and that will be true when the 204 additional tools described in this document are deployed. The use of 205 some tools is currently required by the IETF procedures, such as the 206 audio recordings that are put in the proceedings. This document does 207 not mandate the use of any particular tool by a WG, but such a 208 requirement might be made by others, such as an Area Director 209 requiring the use of a particular tool by one or more WGs in their 210 area. 212 This document is being produced at the request of the IAOC. The 213 request for proposals that led to this document can be found at 214 [RPS-RFP]. This document does not specify specific technologies or 215 instantiations of tools. Instead, it is meant to be used as a guide 216 for the IAOC to later contract the development and deployment of the 217 tools described here. 219 Requirements in this document are numbered, such as "**Requirement 220 04-00**". 222 The requirements covered in this document apply almost exclusively to 223 tools and services that are used for remote participation in real- 224 time meetings. The document does not cover the many other tools used 225 by WGs for non-real-time communication such as mailing lists, issue 226 trackers, document flow control systems, and so on. Many of the non- 227 real-time tools are also being improved over time, but they are not 228 the subject of this document. 230 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 231 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 232 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 234 This document is being discussed on the vmeet@ietf.org mailing list. 235 See for more 236 information. 238 2. Requirements for Supporting Remote Participation in Regular IETF 239 Meetings 241 This section covers the requirements for effective remote 242 participation in meetings where most members are in regular IETF 243 face-to-face meetings. Some of the requirements in this section 244 overlap with those in Section 3, but many are unique to meetings that 245 have a large number of attendees physically present. 247 **Requirement 04-01**: The specifications in the RPS MUST rely upon 248 IETF and other open standards for all communications and interactions 249 wherever possible unless there is an identified gap that cannot be 250 met by those standards. 252 **Requirement 04-02**: All tools in the RPS SHOULD be able to be run 253 on the widest possible array of computers. The tools may be stand- 254 alone applications, may be run from a modern web browser, or from the 255 command line. The highest priority is that the tool need to be 256 available on all of (at least) MacOS version 10.6 or later, Windows 7 257 or later, and any common Linux distribution produced in 2010 or 258 later. A lower priority is that the tools be able to run on IOS and 259 Android platforms. The tools MUST NOT rely on Adobe Flash to work 260 correctly. 262 **Requirement 04-03**: Audio, video, instant messaging, and slide 263 streams going to and from remote attendees SHOULD be delivered in as 264 close to real-time as is practically possible. When possible, the 265 delivery SHOULD have delays of less than 200 milliseconds to remote 266 attendees who are on fast Internet connections. A common complaint 267 with the current RPS is that the streaming audio can take more than 268 10 seconds (and sometimes as much as 30 seconds) to reach the remote 269 attendee. This causes many of the problems listed in Appendix A.4.1. 271 **Requirement 04-04**: The outgoing audio, video, and slide streams 272 MUST have the same delays so the remote attendee does not get 273 confused during slide presentations. 275 **Requirement 04-05**: All streaming information from the RPS SHOULD 276 be usable over Internet connections running at 56Kbps. Many remote 277 attendees will be in places with limited bandwidth. 279 **Requirement 04-06**: Both local and remote attendees SHOULD be able 280 to easily contact a single entity who is available throughout the 281 meeting if they find problems with any of the RPS tools, and to get 282 fairly rapid response. This entity needs to be able to handle as RPS 283 tool problems in the meeting rooms, or be able to quickly contact 284 someone who can address those problems. 286 **Requirement 04-07**: Any tools that are used by remote attendees 287 MUST also be available to local attendees as well. At many IETF 288 meetings, some local attendees act as remote attendees in WG meetings 289 that they are not sitting in, so they can attend two WGs at once. 291 2.1. Registration for Remote Participation 293 Remote attendees who make contributions to the IETF (as defined in 294 [BCP78]) are bound by the "Note Well" text. By allowing registration 295 before participating remotely, remote attendees can be better alerted 296 to, and thus bound to, the requirements of contributors. This is 297 particularly important because it is easy in the IETF process to 298 change from being an observer to being a contributor. For example, 299 many people who say things in a WG's IM room do not realize that they 300 are bound by the "Note Well" text. 302 **Requirement 04-08**: All remote attendees at regular IETF meetings 303 and interim meetings who make contributions MUST register with the 304 IETF Secretariat before contributing using any of the RPS tools. 306 **Requirement 04-09**: Remote attendees who will only be listening 307 and/or watching, but not making contributions, MUST NOT be required 308 to register. 310 **Requirement 04-10**: Registration for remote attendees SHOULD be no 311 more onerous than joining a WG mail list. Basically, the registrant 312 should acknowledge the Note Well, prove that they are at the given 313 email address, and receive confirmation that they are registered. 314 The confirmation will also include any passwords needed for the RPS 315 tools. 317 **Requirement 04-11**: The RPS tools (particularly the registration 318 tool) MUST gracefully handle multiple attendees who have the same 319 name. 321 The cost for remote attendees to register, if any, is not covered in 322 this document but will instead be determined by the IETF at a later 323 time. There are many ideas on the subject (tiered costs for 324 different services, no cost at all for the first year, and others), 325 but the effects of different cost structures is beyond the scope of 326 this document. 328 2.2. Instant Messaging 330 Instant messaging (IM) is used both as a remote participation tool 331 and as a communication tool for local attendees at a regular meeting. 332 Although the current tool's Jabber room is a good way to get 333 questions to the mic, it also becomes a second communications channel 334 that only a few people in the room are participating in. The instant 335 messaging system is also useful for remote users to ask about the 336 status of the room ("is anyone there?"). 338 **Requirement 04-12**: The IM system MUST allow anyone to see all 339 messages in the WG's or BoF's room. 341 **Requirement 04-13**: The IM system MUST allow any registered user 342 to post messages in the WG's or BoF's room. 344 **Requirement 04-14**: The date and time that a message appears in an 345 IM stream MUST be retained. IM clients MUST be able to show an 346 indication of the date and time for all messages. Someone coming 347 into a meeting late requires context for which messages in an instant 348 messaging room are recent and which are old. 350 2.3. Audio 352 Audio from face-to-face meetings travels in two directions: from the 353 room to remote attendees, and (potentially) from remote attendees to 354 the room. Comments on early drafts of this document indicated that 355 the latter may not really be a requirement for all attendees if IM- 356 to-mic is made predictable. Given this, reliable IM-to-mic relay for 357 comments to speakers is highest priority, audio from remote attendees 358 giving presentations is a second priority, and audio from remote 359 attendees giving comments to the room is a third priority. 361 2.3.1. Audio to Remote Attendees 363 **Requirement 04-15**: Remote attendees MUST be able to hear what is 364 said by local attendees and chairs at any mic in the meeting. 366 **Requirement 04-16**: Remote attendees SHOULD be able to hear the 367 audio stream over the PSTN. 369 2.3.2. IM-to-Mic Relay of Comments from Remote Attendees 371 As described in Appendix A.4.1, the current tools support an informal 372 method for remote attendees to speak at the mic: in the Jabber room, 373 they enter the string "mic:" before their comment and hope that the 374 designated scribe or someone else goes to the mic to relay the 375 comment. This method works, but the current implementation has 376 significant flaws described in that section. 378 **Requirement 04-17**: Relay of messages from IM to the mic MUST be 379 able to happen as quickly as if the remote attendee was local. 381 **Requirement 04-18**: The person relaying from IM to the mic must be 382 available throughout the WG meeting. To date, this has been done by 383 WG volunteers in the room. In the future, it could be done the same 384 way, or maybe could be facilitated by hiring people to attend 385 meetings for the specific purpose of being IM-to-mic scribes, or 386 maybe could be done with tools that allow copy-and-paste of text from 387 IM to a speech synthesizer that reads it to the room. 389 **Requirement 04-19**: If multiple remote attendees want to comment 390 at the same time, the person relaying from IM to the mic MUST be able 391 to relay for all of them. 393 Note: during the development of this document, there have been many 394 suggestions for how WG chairs can better manage the IM-to-mic 395 relaying (for example, with planned pauses, better tracking of the IM 396 room, and so on). Because these are actually about improving WG 397 chairs, not the RPS tools, they are out of scope for this document. 399 2.3.3. Audio for Presentations from Remote Attendees 401 In order for a remote attendee to be a presenter, their voice needs 402 to be heard in the meeting room. This functionality is different 403 than allowing remote attendees from giving comments (covered in 404 Section 2.3.4) in that the the WG chair needs much less floor control 405 for one speaker than for many. 407 **Requirement 04-20**: A remote attendee giving a presentation MUST 408 be able to have their speaking be heard by all local and remote 409 attendees. 411 **Requirement 04-21**: A WG chair MUST be able to control the sound 412 coming from a remote attendee. This control MUST allow reduction in 413 volume, all the way to complete muting, of the remote speaker. 415 **Requirement 04-22**: Audible echo in the audio stream MUST be 416 damped and/or eliminated by the tools. The RPS MUST recognize 417 audible echo and automatically take measures to reduce it to a level 418 which won't distract listeners. 420 **Requirement 04-23**: The audio system used by the RPS MUST be able 421 to integrate with systems commonly used in the venues used for IETF 422 meetings. 424 2.3.4. Audio from Remote Attendees to the Room for Comments 426 Note that the requirements here assume a very large change in the way 427 that remote participation will happen. Instead of a remote attendee 428 typing something into the Jabber room that someone will repeat at a 429 mic in the room, remote attendees will use their own mics to speak to 430 the meeting. Some of the requirements from Section 2.3.3 will apply 431 here as well. 433 **Requirement 04-24**: Remote attendees MUST be able to speak 434 directly to a meeting without going through a local attendee, and 435 have their speaking be heard by local attendees. (Note that the 436 ability to speak is controlled by the chair; see Section 2.3.4.1.) 438 **Requirement 04-25**: Local attendees MUST be able to determine 439 which remote attendee is speaking. 441 **Requirement 04-26**: When a remote attendee connects to the audio 442 stream to the room, their mic SHOULD start off muted. This will 443 prevent problems such as those common with WebEx where a remote 444 attendee doesn't realize that they can be heard. 446 **Requirement 04-27**: A lower-priority requirement is for remote 447 attendees to be able to speak to the room by originating from the 448 PSTN. 450 2.3.4.1. Floor Control for Chairs for Audio from Remote Attendees 452 It is not yet clear how the set of remote attendees would be treated 453 for queueing. Some tools have each remote attendee being considered 454 separately, while others pool all remote attendees into one group. 455 This affects the chair knowing and being able to act on the order 456 that remote attendees ask to speak. 458 Note that, if the remote video to room requirements from 459 Section 2.4.2 need to be met, it is very likely that a related 460 requirement to those below is that "the audio and video floor 461 controls must be in the same tool". 463 **Requirement 04-28**: Remote attendees MUST have an easy and 464 standardized way of requesting the attention of the chair when the 465 remote attendee wants to speak. The remote attendee MUST also be 466 able to easily cancel an attention request. 468 **Requirement 04-29**: The RPS MUST allow a remote attendee's request 469 for attention to include an optional short text string. A remote 470 attendee might want to indicate that they are asking a question of 471 the presenter, or answering a question that someone else asked at the 472 mic, or want to bring up a new topic. 474 **Requirement 04-30**: Remote attendee's requests MUST be part of the 475 floor control tool, not in the instant messaging system. 477 **Requirement 04-31**: The floor control portion of the RPS MUST give 478 a remote attendee who is allowed to speak a clear signal when they 479 should and should not speak. 481 **Requirement 04-32**: The chair MUST be able to see all requests 482 from remote attendees to speak at any time during the entire meeting 483 (not just during presentations) in the floor control system. 485 **Requirement 04-33**: The floor control system MUST allow a chair to 486 easily turn off and on an individual's ability to speak over the 487 audio at any time. 489 **Requirement 04-34**: The floor control system MUST allow a chair to 490 easily mute all remote attendees. 492 **Requirement 04-35**: The floor control system MUST allow a chair to 493 easily allow all remote attendees to speak without requesting 494 permission; that is, the chair MUST be able to easily turn on all 495 remote attendees mics at once. 497 **Requirement 04-36**: The floor control system for the chair MUST be 498 able to be run by at least two users at the same time. It is common 499 for a chair to leave the room, to have a side discussion with an AD, 500 or to become a presenter. They should be able to do so without 501 having to do a handoff of the floor control capability. 503 **Requirement 04-37**: The RPS MUST authenticate users who can use 504 the floor control system in a particular meeting using simple 505 passwords. 507 **Requirement 04-38**: The IETF Secretariat MUST be able to easily 508 set up the individuals allowed to use the floor control system for a 509 particular meeting and to change the settings at any time, including 510 during the meeting. 512 **Requirement 04-39**: The chair SHOULD be able to monitor the sound 513 levels of the audio being delivered to remote attendees to be sure 514 that they can hear what is going on in the room. 516 2.4. Video 518 The IETF has experimented with one-way and two-way video at some 519 meetings in the past few years. Remote attendees have said that 520 seeing people in the meetings gave them a better understanding of the 521 meeting; at a recent meeting, a remote presenter was able to see the 522 people in line at the mic and was better able to interact with them. 523 The requirements for video from remote attendees to meeting rooms 524 parallel the requirements for audio from remote attendees to meeting 525 rooms. The IETF video may need to integrate with the video systems 526 at some meeting venues. 528 2.4.1. Video from the Room to Remote Attendees 530 **Requirement 04-40**: Remote attendees MUST be able to see the 531 presenter at a meeting. A lower-priority requirement is that remote 532 attendees SHOULD be able to see who is speaking at the mics in the 533 room. 535 **Requirement 04-41**: Remote attendees MUST be able to see local 536 attendees at any mic in the meeting. 538 2.4.2. Video from Remote Attendees to the Room 540 Note that the requirements in this section have the same priorities 541 as for audio for remote presentations (Section 2.3.3) and audio from 542 remote attendees to the room for comments (Section 2.3.4). 544 **Requirement 04-42**: When video is allowed for remote attendees to 545 give presentations (as described in Section 2.3.3), the audience in 546 the room SHOULD be able to see the presenter speaking. 548 **Requirement 04-43**: When video is allowed for remote attendees for 549 comments, the floor management tool for audio (as described in 550 Section 2.3.4.1) MUST also control video as well. 552 **Requirement 04-44**: The RPS MUST have the capability of showing 553 video of the remote attendee who is speaking over the audio to the 554 local attendees. 556 **Requirement 04-45**: A remote attendee who is speaking MUST be able 557 to choose what is shown to local attendees: video of them speaking, a 558 still picture of their face or avatar, or just their name. 560 **Requirement 04-46**: The RPS MUST give a remote attendee a clear 561 indication when their video image or selected image is being shown to 562 the local attendees. 564 2.5. Slide Presentations and Distribution 566 **Requirement 04-47**: The RPS MUST be able to handle both PDF and 567 PowerPoint formats (".ppt" and ".pptx") for distributed slides. 569 **Requirement 04-48**: The RPS MUST automatically convert PowerPoint 570 presentations to PDF and make both available for distribution at the 571 same time. 573 **Requirement 04-49**: Presenters MUST be able to update their slides 574 on the IETF site up to just before their presentation, if such update 575 is allowed by the WG chairs. 577 **Requirement 04-50**: Chairs MUST be able to approve or disapprove 578 of any slide submission or updates, with the default being that all 579 submissions are allowed. 581 In many current remote participation systems, slide presentations and 582 the video coming from in-meeting cameras are sent as two separate 583 streams (called the "slide stream" and the "camera stream"). The 584 slide stream is usually much lower bandwidth than the camera stream, 585 so remote attendees with limited bandwidth can choose to watch just 586 the slide stream. Separating the streams allows remote attendees to 587 see the slide stream and the camera streams in separate windows that 588 can be independently sized. 590 **Requirement 04-51**: The RPS MUST transmit the slide stream 591 separately from the camera stream. 593 **Requirement 04-52**: The slide stream MUST represent the slides as 594 they are projected in the room, allowing the presenter to go back and 595 forth, as well as to edit slides in real time. This makes it clear 596 to the remote attendees which set of slides, and which slide number, 597 is being currently shown. 599 **Requirement 04-53**: When remote presentations are supported (see 600 Section 2.3.3), the remote presenter SHOULD be able to control the 601 slides. This is a lower-priority requirement because this could be 602 easily done by a local attendee listening to the remote presenter. 604 2.6. Shared Text Document Editing 606 In some WG meetings, there is an attempt to edit a text document with 607 input from the local attendees. This is typically done for proposed 608 charter changes, but sometimes happens on a WG document or the 609 meeting's agenda. This is usually unsuccessful, given the amount of 610 text and the size of what can be displayed on the screen. In recent 611 meetings, shared text document editing has been used for editing 612 charters and for taking minutes of meetings. 614 An RPS tool for shared text document editing would be equally useful 615 for local and remote attendees watching the edits happen in real- 616 time. There is a good chance that this tool would be watched by 617 local attendees on their laptops instead of being projected on the 618 screen because of the small size of the the text. This, in turn, 619 means that local attendees who aren't using their laptops at the 620 moment would not be able to participate by watching. 622 **Requirement 04-54**: Shared real-time editing of text documents 623 MUST be supported. This system must allow at least three people to 624 have write access and hundreds of people to have read access to any 625 particular document. 627 **Requirement 04-55**: It MUST be easy to start a new text shared 628 document and to import existing text into a shared document. 630 **Requirement 04-56**: Remote attendees MUST be able to be either the 631 writers or the readers of shared documents. 633 **Requirement 04-57**: Those with read access MUST be able to see the 634 edits made by those with write access within less that five seconds 635 after each edit. 637 **Requirement 04-58**: It MUST be easy to change the permissions for 638 who gets write access to a document during an editing session. 640 **Requirement 04-59**: A much-lower priority requirement is the 641 ability for group-editing of graphics. 643 2.7. Archiving 645 Archived recordings of the events of the meetings are valuable for 646 remote attendees who are not able to hear everything in real time. 648 **Requirement 04-60**: The RPS MUST support storage and distribution 649 of recordings of the audio, video, and slide presentations for all WG 650 meetings. 652 **Requirement 04-61**: Transcripts of the instant messaging for all 653 meetings MUST be kept for distribution after IETF meetings. 655 **Requirement 04-62**: The recordings and transcripts SHOULD be made 656 available during the meetings, within a day of them being made. 658 **Requirement 04-63**: Users MUST be able to easily find the archives 659 of the recordings and instant messaging transcripts of a particular 660 WG or BoF session at a particular meeting. 662 **Requirement 04-64**: The RPS SHOULD support indexing of archived 663 audio and video for particular events in meetings such as when 664 speakers change. 666 **Requirement 04-65**: The RPS MUST support recording and storage of 667 recordings of the audio, video, and slide presentations of interim 668 meetings as well as regular IETF meetings. 670 **Requirement 04-66**: Given that interim meetings are run without 671 the help of the IETF Secretariat, making these recordings MUST be 672 easy for WG chairs. 674 2.8. Polling 676 The common IETF method of assessing support is a straw poll, 677 sometimes managed by audible humming, sometimes by raising hands. 679 **Requirement 04-67**: A system for yes/no/abstain polling meeting 680 attendees, including remote attendees at the same time, MUST be 681 provided. It MUST be easy to set up a simple poll, and it must be 682 easy for all local and remote attendees to find the poll and 683 participate. Note that this would add a requirement that everyone in 684 a meeting be using their computer to participate in the poll. 686 2.9. Plenaries 688 **Requirement 04-68**: Remote attendees SHOULD be able to make 689 comments at the mic approximately as well as if they were local 690 attendees. This means that either remote audio to the plenary room 691 speakers be available, or that IM-to-room relay be available. 693 **Requirement 04-69**: Transmitting real-time transcription of 694 plenary speakers to remote attendees MUST be supported. The lag in 695 transmission MUST be less than five seconds. 697 2.10. Use by IETF Leadership 699 The requirements for bodies like the IESG and IAB to use the RPS 700 during regular IETF meetings are similar to those of most WGs. The 701 main difference is that they need a way to limit who can participate 702 remotely. 704 **Requirement 04-70**: The chair or meeting facilitator MUST be able 705 to easily limit remote access of all tools (both for listening/ 706 observing and contributing) to meetings on a room-by-room basis. 708 **Requirement 04-71**: The IETF Secretariat must be able to limit 709 attendees in restricted meetings using a simple authentication 710 mechanism. 712 Note that the IETF leadership will also heavily use the remote 713 participation tools between IETF meetings in a manner that is very 714 similar to virtual interim meetings. 716 2.11. Preparation 718 Both WG chairs and attendees need to be able to prepare for an IETF 719 meeting and individual WG meetings. The more tools that might be 720 used in a meeting, the more important it is that the chairs and 721 attendees be able to prepare easily. 723 2.11.1. Preparation for WG Chairs 725 **Requirement 04-72**: WG chairs MUST be able to test whether or not 726 the tools for their session are working at least 30 minutes before 727 the meeting begins (unless, of course, there is already another 728 meeting occurring in the room during that time). 730 **Requirement 04-73**: There MUST be written operational 731 documentation for each RPS tool that is accessible at all times. 732 This will help reduce problems where a WG chair is having problems 733 during a meeting that is affecting the meeting as a whole. 735 **Requirement 04-74**: There SHOULD be training materials for WG 736 chairs in how to use the RPS tools. 738 **Requirement 04-75**: There SHOULD be a tool that allows a WG chair 739 to prepare each tool that will be used in their WG meeting. Such a 740 tool would let the WG chair specify which RPS tools they will use. 742 **Requirement 04-76**: There SHOULD be a custom checklist for each WG 743 that helps the chair prepare for their meeting. The checklist would 744 enumerate the steps needed before the meeting begins, to start the 745 meeting, during the meeting, to close the meeting, and after a 746 meeting. 748 2.11.2. Preparation for Remote Attendees 750 **Requirement 04-77**: Remote attendees MUST be able to easily find 751 all the material they need to effectively participate, including 752 links to audio, video, instant messaging, slides, and so on. This 753 material MUST be available well before the time of the meeting. The 754 page with the meeting material SHOULD allow the remote attendee to 755 easily perform a time conversion to and from the local time at the 756 IETF meeting. 758 **Requirement 04-78**: There MUST be a constantly-running testing 759 service that covers all interactive tools (audio, video, slide 760 display, and so on) for at least a week before the meeting begins. 761 Remote attendees need to be able to test the remote participation 762 setup before a regular meeting, and even during the meeting. 764 **Requirement 04-79**: The testing service MUST run throughout the 765 meeting so that last-minute joiners can test their systems. 767 **Requirement 04-80**: The testing service SHOULD allow remote 768 attendees to also test whether their outgoing audio, video, and slide 769 control works. 771 **Requirement 04-81**: A remote attendee who starts using one or more 772 tools after a meeting has begun MUST be able to tell what is 773 happening in the meeting. In specific, there MUST be an indication 774 if the meeting has not started, if the meeting is happening (even if 775 there is silence on the mics), and if the meeting is over. 777 3. Requirements for Supporting Remote Participation in Interim Meetings 779 One of the goals of this document is to increase the effectiveness of 780 interim meetings. Interim meetings are now uncommon, but might 781 become more common (and more effective) if the remote participation 782 becomes more useful. 784 The requirements for meetings that are all remote (that is, with no 785 local attendees) are mostly a subset of the requirements for remote 786 participation in a regular IETF meetings and face-to-face interim 787 meeting. 789 **Requirement 04-82**: The RPS SHOULD have a central location where 790 the specifics about how remote participation is supported for every 791 WG interim meeting. This will reduce the problems often seen where 792 messages about how to participate in an interim meeting get buried in 793 the WG mailing list. 795 **Requirement 04-83**: There SHOULD be documentation and training for 796 the RPS tools specifically targeted at WG chairs who will lead 797 interim meetings. 799 **Requirement 04-84**: The RPS tools MUST be at least partially 800 usable at face-to-face meetings other than regular IETF meetings. 801 The number of the tools that might be available will be different for 802 different venues for the virtual interims, but at a minimum, the 803 following MUST be supported for remote attendees: 805 o Registration 807 o Room audio 809 o Instant messaging 811 o Slide distribution 813 o Slide presentation 815 o Shared document editing 817 4. IANA Considerations 819 None. [[ ...and thus this section can be removed before publication 820 as an RFC... ]] 822 5. Security Considerations 824 People who participate remotely in face-to-face IETF meetings might 825 expect the same level of privacy as they have when they participate 826 directly in those meetings. Some of the proposed tools might cause 827 it to be easier to know which WGs a remote attendee was following. 828 When RPS tools are deployed, the IETF should describe the privacy 829 implications of using such a tool to the users so they can decide 830 whether or not to use the tools. 832 The eventual RPS tools will have some user authentication that will 833 associate people with actions. For example, a remote user might need 834 to authenticate to the system in order to give a presentation or 835 speak during a session. The credentials needed for this 836 authentication will need to be managed in a secure fashion, both by 837 the system and by the people who are being identified. 839 6. Acknowledgements 841 Many of the ideas in this document were contributed by members of the 842 IETF community based on their experiences during recent IETF 843 meetings. There are also many contributions from people on the 844 vmeet@ietf.org mailing list, WG chairs, and attendees in the RPSREQS 845 BoF at IETF 83 in Paris. 847 Some of the text in this document originated in the request for 848 proposals that was issued by the IAOC that led to this document. 850 7. Informative References 852 [BCP78] Bradner, S. and J. Contreras, "Rights Contributors Provide 853 to the IETF Trust", BCP 78, RFC 5378, November 2008. 855 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 856 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 858 [RFC2418] Bradner, S., "IETF Working Group Guidelines and 859 Procedures", BCP 25, RFC 2418, September 1998. 861 [RFC6120] Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence 862 Protocol (XMPP): Core", RFC 6120, March 2011. 864 [RFC6121] Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence 865 Protocol (XMPP): Instant Messaging and Presence", 866 RFC 6121, March 2011. 868 [RPS-RFP] IAOC, "Request for Proposals for Requirements Development 869 for Remote Participation Services", 2011, . 873 Appendix A. Background on IETF Remote Participation 875 The IETF has a long history of using remote participation tools. 876 This history causes many IETF participants to have strong opinions 877 about what future tools should provide and who should benefit from 878 those tools. The purpose of this section is to describe many of the 879 common perceptions of the current tools so that the reader 880 understands what might be expected of future tools. 882 Users' experience with the current IETF tools vary widely. Some 883 participants think the tools are fine and are grateful that they 884 exist. Other participants find them barely acceptable because they 885 have used better tools in other environments. Often, local attendees 886 mostly forget that the remote attendees are participating until one 887 gets gets reminded, such as by something said at the mic. Local 888 attendees don't have a feeling for how many remote attendees are just 889 listening like most of the local attendees. 891 The variety of current experiences can help inform the discussion of 892 how to improve the tools. The experiences described in this appendix 893 are derived from the current tools. It is important to note that 894 people who attend IETF meetings often experience the tools quite 895 differently than those who participate remotely. 897 The IETF has years of experience with the three primary tools used at 898 its regular meetings: prepared slides that are distributed before and 899 during the meeting, Jabber for IM, and streaming audio. This section 900 discusses some of the reactions of users -- those in the meetings and 901 those who have participated remotely -- to the current tools. 903 Remote attendees typically participate by asking questions or making 904 statements during or after presentations, and they also participate 905 in discussions in the instant messaging channel. Local attendees who 906 are using the RPS typically don't participate "remotely": they are 907 using the tools to be able to see what is happening in different 908 rooms when they need to be two or more places at once. 910 A.1. How the IETF Meets 912 o WG sessions at regular IETF meetings -- A typical regular IETF 913 meeting has about 150 sessions lasting one to two and one half 914 hours each, with up to 8 of those sessions happening at the same 915 time. A session might have between 20 and 200 local attendees in 916 the room, and might have only a few or many dozens of remote 917 attendees. WG sessions typically have one to three co-chairs at 918 the front of the room and a series of individuals who come to the 919 front to present; some presentations are made by small panels. 921 o Plenaries at regular IETF meetings -- There are usually two 922 plenaries at a regular IETF meeting, with on-site attendance of 923 about 700 local attendees and dozens of remote attendees. There 924 are from 1 to 20 presenters; presentations may be made by multiple 925 people. 927 o AD-sponsored lunch meetings at regular IETF meetings -- These 928 meetings are scheduled by the IETF Secretariat. Regular IETF 929 meetings are more than just a group of WG meetings. Remote 930 attendees may want to participate in the other parts of a regular 931 meeting as well. 933 o Face-to-face interim WG meetings -- Between regular IETF meetings, 934 some WGs hold interim meetings where attendees get together at a 935 site (often a company's meeting room, but sometimes a meeting room 936 rented at a hotel). At such meetings, there are between a handful 937 and a few dozen local attendees and a similar number of remote 938 attendees, if remote participation is supported. Presentations 939 are common. There are typically fewer than 15 face-to-fact 940 interim meetings a year. 942 o Virtual interim WG meetings -- Between regular IETF meetings, some 943 WGs hold virtual interim meetings where there are no local 944 attendees because there is no central meeting location. There are 945 between a handful and a few dozen attendees. Presentations are 946 common. There are typically fewer than 25 face-to-fact interim 947 meetings a year. 949 o IETF leadership meetings -- The IETF leadership (the IESG, IAOC, 950 IAB, and probably others) have periodic virtual meetings, usually 951 with presentations. These groups also meet at the regular IETF 952 meetings, and sometimes have remote attendees at those meetings 953 (such as members who cannot attend the IETF meeting or presenters 954 who are not part of the leadership group). 956 The form of "presentations" changes from meeting to meeting, but 957 almost always includes prepared static slides and audio of the 958 speaker. Presentations sometimes also includes non-static slides 959 (usually animations within a slide) and sometimes video. 961 A.2. Technologies Currently Used at Regular IETF Meetings 963 There are three tools that are used by remote attendees for WG 964 participation at regular IETF meetings: real-time audio, instant 965 messaging, and slides. 967 For the past few years, the IETF has used audio streamed over HTTP 968 over TCP. TCP is often buffered at many places between (and in) the 969 origination in the IETF meeting venue and the users' computer. At 970 recent meetings, delays of around 30 seconds have been recorded, with 971 minimum delays typically being five seconds. This delay is caused by 972 buffering at the hop-by-hop ISPs and in the remote attendee's 973 computer. At recent IETF meetings, remote attendance is almost 974 always less than 10% of local attendance, and is often less than 5%. 975 (There are more remote attendees when the IETF meeting is in the 976 U.S.) Each stream is represented by an MP3 playlist (sometimes called 977 an "m3u file"). 979 The IETF long ago standardized on Jabber / XMPP ([RFC6120], 980 [RFC6121], and others) for instant messaging used within the IETF. 981 Jabber rooms (formally called "multi-user conferences" or "MUCs") 982 exist for every WG, and those rooms are live all the time, not just 983 during regular IETF meetings. BoFs have jabber rooms that are 984 available during IETF meetings. There are also stable Jabber rooms 985 for the plenaries and certain other activities. BoFs are usually 986 assigned Jabber rooms before a regular meeting. 988 Presentation slides normally are stored either as PDFs or in one of 989 Microsoft's formats for PowerPoint. They are projected on a local 990 screen from someone's laptop computer. Proceedings are currently 991 stored as PDF of the slides, although they used to be stored as HTML. 993 There has been experience at recent meetings with two tools, WebEx 994 and Meetecho, which are supported experimentally by the IETF. Each 995 tool was used by a handful of WGs with mixed success. The tools 996 require remote attendees to use specific clients, and installation of 997 those clients caused problems for some people. On the other hand, 998 the tools have much more robust meeting control features, and 999 attendees appreciated the real-time showing of slides during 1000 presentations. 1002 A.3. Locating the Meeting Information 1004 Finding information for the real-time audio, instant messaging, and 1005 slides for an upcoming or current regular meeting is complicated by 1006 that information being in many different locations on the IETF web 1007 site, and the fact that the relevant URLs can change before and even 1008 during the meeting. Further, a WG chair might copy the latest 1009 information and send it to the WG mailing list, but there can be 1010 later changes. Experienced remote attendees have gotten used to 1011 checking just before the meeting itself, but even that does not 1012 always guarantee the correct information. 1014 Currently, the meeting information appears in two different agendas: 1016 o The official agenda on the IETF Datatracker includes links to 1017 venue maps, WG charters, agendas, and Internet-Drafts. For 1018 example, see 1019 . 1021 o The unofficial "tools-style agenda" includes the same links as the 1022 official agenda plus links to the presentations, audio, minutes, 1023 Jabber room, and Jabber logs 9represnted as small icons). For 1024 example, see . 1026 A.3.1. Audio 1028 The URL for the audio stream for a WG or BoF meeting is based on the 1029 room that the meeting is in. The audio streams are announced on the 1030 general IETF mailing list (ietf@ietf.org) before each meeting. 1032 A common complaint is that when a WG meeting moves to a different 1033 room, remote users need to know about the move so that they can use 1034 the proper URL to hear the audio stream. The room changes are often, 1035 but not always, announced on WG mailing lists; when they are not 1036 announced, there is no easy way for a remote attendee to find out 1037 which audio stream they should be listening to. Sometimes, room 1038 changes happen just as a WG meeting is starting, making it nearly 1039 impossible for a remote attendee to know about the change in streams. 1041 IETF meetings happen in venues such as hotels and conference centers, 1042 most of which have their own audio setups. The IETF Secretariat 1043 contracts with those venues for the use of some or all of their audio 1044 system. Without such integration, audio from remote attendees might 1045 not be reliably heard by local attendees. 1047 A.3.2. Instant Messaging 1049 The Jabber rooms used by WGs and BoFs do not change between IETF 1050 meetings, so finding the right Jabber room is relatively easy. Some 1051 Jabber clients have odd interfaces for joining Jabber rooms, and this 1052 can cause some problems; even though attendees can test their Jabber 1053 clients before a meeting, there still seems to be some who need help 1054 just before a WG meeting. There are sometimes problems with people 1055 joining Jabber rooms; in these cases, the attendee needs to find 1056 someone already in the Jabber room to invite them to the discussion. 1058 A.3.3. Slides 1060 Slides are presented in regular IETF meetings with projectors on a 1061 screen at the front of the room from the video output of one or more 1062 local attendees' computers. The same slides are available online for 1063 remote attendees. 1065 Slides are available to local and remote attendees on the IETF 1066 servers before and during regular IETF meetings. This service is 1067 useful to all attendees who want to be prepared for WG meetings. The 1068 slides are not only used by remote attendees listening to the WG 1069 meeting; it is common for local attendees to download the slides and 1070 view them on their laptops during meetings instead of having to read 1071 them from the front of the room. 1073 Slides are available from the meeting materials page. Many, but 1074 certainly not all, local and remote attendees know how to find the 1075 meeting materials page. 1077 It has become fairly common for presenters to not have their 1078 presentations available for distribution until just before the WG 1079 meeting. Because materials are uploaded by the WG chairs, this often 1080 causes the beginning of WG meetings to be a dance involving 1081 presenters giving the chairs their slides, followed by chairs 1082 uploading the slides to the IETF site, followed by the chairs saying 1083 "the slides are there now". 1085 A.4. Remote Participation at IETF Meetings 1087 A.4.1. Remotely Speaking at the Mic 1089 Newcomers to regular IETF meetings often expect the floor control in 1090 WG meetings to be fairly straight-forward. By Tuesday, they might be 1091 shaking their heads, wondering why some people cut into the mic 1092 lines, why some people get up to the mics after the chair has closed 1093 the line, why some people ignore presenters' requests to hold 1094 questions to the end, and so on. Mixing remote attendees into this 1095 social structure will be a daunting task, but one that has been dealt 1096 with in many remote participation systems. 1098 In order for a remote attendee to speak at the mic, a local attendee 1099 must say it for them. In most WG and BoF meetings, this is done by 1100 the remote attendee typing into the Jabber room for the meeting, and 1101 some local attendee going to the mic and repeating what was typed 1102 into the Jabber room. Remote attendees often precede what they want 1103 said at the mic with the string "mic:" to differentiate that from the 1104 rest of the discussion in the Jabber room. 1106 In some WGs, there have been experiments of getting remote attendees 1107 voices into the room either by hooking into the room's sound system 1108 or pointing a mic at the speaker of a laptop. This sometimes works, 1109 but sometimes has bad feedback and delay issues that make the remote 1110 participation worse than having a person reading their comments at 1111 the mic. 1113 The "Jabber-to-mic" method of participation often works adequately, 1114 but there are many places where it fails. It has issues similar to 1115 most proxy approaches where a human is in center of the loop. The 1116 following is a compendium of stories from recent IETF meetings and 1117 interim face-to-face meetings where remotely speaking at the mic 1118 didn't work as well as it could have. The list is given here to both 1119 point out what some WGs are willing to put up with currently, and to 1120 show what is needed if the eventual RPS uses Jabber-to-mic as part of 1121 the solution. The attendees are Chris and Carl (WG co-chairs), Sam 1122 (volunteer Jabber scribe), Rachel and Robert (remote attendees), Pete 1123 (presenter), and Len and Lee (local attendees). 1125 o Robert cannot understand what Pete is saying about slide 5, but 1126 Sam doesn't get Pete's attention until Pete is already on slide 7 1127 and Pete doesn't want to go back. 1129 o Rachel wants to say something, but Sam's Jabber client has crashed 1130 and no one else in the Jabber room knows why Sam isn't going to 1131 the mic. 1133 o Robert wants to say something, but Sam is already at the mic 1134 speaking for Rachel so Sam doesn't see Robert's message until he 1135 has gotten out of the mic line. 1137 o Sam is speaking for Robert, and Rachel wants to comment on what 1138 Robert said. Unless Sam reads the message as he is walking back 1139 to his seat, Rachel doesn't get to speak. 1141 o Robert wants to say something at the mic, but Sam is having an 1142 important side discussion with the AD. 1144 o Sam is also the minutes taker, and is too busy at the moment 1145 catching up with the lively debate at the mic to relay a question 1146 from Rachel. 1148 o Chris thought Carl was watching the Jabber room, but Carl was 1149 reading the draft that is being discussed. 1151 o Chris and Carl start the meeting by asking for volunteers to take 1152 minutes and be Jabber scribe. They couldn't find a Jabber scribe, 1153 and it took a lot of begging to get someone to take minutes, so 1154 they figured that was the best they could do. 1156 o Sam is also a presenter, and Robert has a question about Sam's 1157 presentation, but Sam is obviously not looking at the Jabber room 1158 at the time. 1160 o Rachel asks a question through Sam, and Pete replies. Len, who is 1161 next in line at the mic, starts talking before Sam has a chance to 1162 see whether or not Rachel has a follow-up question. 1164 o Robert makes a point about one of Pete's slides, and Pete responds 1165 "I don't think you're looking at the right slide" and continues 1166 with his presentation. Robert cannot reply in a timely fashion 1167 due to the lag in the audio channel. 1169 o Pete starts his presentation by asking for questions to be held 1170 until the end. Robert has a question about slide 5, and is 1171 waiting until the end of the presentation to post the question in 1172 the Jabber room. After slide 7, Len jumps to the mic and 1173 vehemently disagrees with something that Pete said. Then Lee gets 1174 up to respond to Len, and the three of them go at it for a while, 1175 with Lee getting up again after slide 10. The presentation ends 1176 and is over time, so Carl says "we need to move on", so Robert 1177 never gets to ask his question. 1179 o Chris asks "are there any more questions" while Rachel is typing 1180 furiously, but she doesn't finish before Chris says "I don't see 1181 anyone, thanks Pete, the next speaker is...". 1183 o Rachel comments on Pete's presentation though Sam. Sam doesn't 1184 understand what Rachel is asking, and Len goes to the mic to 1185 explain. However, Len gets his explanation of what Rachel said 1186 wrong and by the time Pete answers Len's interpretation, Rachel 1187 gives up. 1189 o This is the first time Pete is presenting at an IETF meeting, and 1190 Robert has the first question, which is relayed through Sam. Pete 1191 stays silent, not responding the question. Robert can't see 1192 Pete's face to know if Pete is just not understanding what he 1193 asked, is too afraid to answer, is just angry, or something else. 1195 o Pete says something incorrect in his presentation, and Len asks 1196 the folks in the Jabber room about it. Rachel figures out what 1197 Pete should have said, and others in the Jabber room agree. No 1198 one goes to the mic because Pete has left the topic, but only the 1199 people watching Jabber know that the presentation was wrong. 1201 o Pete says something that the AD sitting at the front of the room 1202 (not near a mic) doesn't like, and the AD says a few sentences but 1203 doesn't go to the mic. The chairs try to repeat what the AD says, 1204 get it only approximately right, but the remote attendees do not 1205 hear what really was said and therefore cannot comment 1206 effectively. 1208 o Sam only volunteered to be scribe because no one else would do it, 1209 and isn't sitting close to the mic, and gets tired of getting up 1210 and down all the time, and doesn't really agree with Robert on a 1211 particular issue, so Sam doesn't relay a request from Robert. 1213 o Rachel cannot join the Jabber room due to a client or server 1214 software issue. She finally finds someone else on Jabber who is 1215 also in the meeting, and gets them to invite her into the room. 1217 A.4.2. Remotely Presenting 1219 Some WGs have experimented with remote presentations at regular IETF 1220 meetings, with quite mixed results. For some, it works fine: the 1221 remote presenter speaks, the chair moves the slides forward, and 1222 questions can be heard easily. For others, it is a mess: the local 1223 attendees can't hear the presenter very well, the presenter can't 1224 hear questions or there is a long delay, and it was not clear when 1225 the presenter was waiting for input or there was a lag in the sound. 1227 At a recent meeting that had a remote presenter, a WG had a video 1228 camera set up at the chairs' desk pointed towards the audience so 1229 that the presenter could see who was at the mic; this was considered 1230 to be a great help and a lot friendlier because the presenter could 1231 address the people at the mic by name. They also had the presenter's 1232 head projected on the screen in the room, which led to a lot of jokes 1233 and discussion of whether seeing the remote presenter caused people 1234 to pay more attention. 1236 Remote presenters have commented how difficult it is to set up their 1237 systems, particularly because they are not sure whether their setup 1238 is working until the moment they are supposed to be presenting. Even 1239 then, the first few minutes of the presentation has a feeling of "is 1240 this really working?". 1242 A.4.3. Floor Control 1244 Although Appendix A.4.1 may seem like it is a bit harsh on WG chairs, 1245 the current tools do not give them the kind of control over remote 1246 attendees that they have over local attendees. The chairs can tell 1247 what is happening at the mics, but have much less view into what is 1248 happening on Jabber, even if they are watching the Jabber room. 1250 Without as much view, they cannot assist the flow of the conversation 1251 as well. 1253 o Carl sees that the Jabber room has an active and useful back- 1254 channel discussion during Pete's provocative presentation. Pete 1255 finishes and asks for questions. Lee and Len rush to the mic 1256 line, and it takes Robert a few seconds to get his question into 1257 the Jabber room and for Sam to go to the mic. Carl tries to 1258 prioritize Sam forward in the line, but Len gets upset when he 1259 does. 1261 o Rachel asks a question, but Sam is not going to the mic to relay 1262 it. In fact, Sam has pretty much stopped paying attention. Chris 1263 cannot do something about the situation without making Sam look 1264 bad. 1266 o Pete has run over time, Robert asks what is supposed to be the 1267 last question, and Pete doesn't understand what Sam said. Carl 1268 cannot tell whether to wait for Robert to rephrase the question or 1269 whether Robert even heard Pete's response. 1271 o In a virtual interim where remote attendees all participate by 1272 voice, someone can be heard typing / eating / talking loudly to 1273 someone else. Carl and Chris try to get that person's attention 1274 over the audio and Jabber, but to no avail. The tool being used 1275 does not have the ability to mute individual attendees, so the 1276 meeting is disrupted until that person finally realizes that he or 1277 she is not muted. 1279 Some of these problems are alleviated by some of the proprietary 1280 solutions that have been experimented with. For example, WebEx and 1281 other systems have a "raise hand" feature where a remote attendee can 1282 indicate in the application or through a web form that they want to 1283 speak. 1285 A.5. Remote Participation at IETF Interim WG Meetings 1287 Face-to-face interim meetings have many things in common with regular 1288 IETF meetings, but there are also many significant differences. For 1289 most WGs, fewer people attend interim meetings than IETF meetings, 1290 although those who travel to a face-to-face interim meeting are often 1291 the more active WG participants. There may be a larger demand for 1292 remote participation because people have a harder time justifying 1293 travel for a single WG meeting than for an IETF meeting, but there 1294 may also be less demand because people tend to think of interim WG 1295 meetings as less important than regular IETF meetings.. 1297 Typically, the IETF Secretariat does not control the rooms in which 1298 face-to-face interims are held, so they have no control over whether 1299 outgoing audio will be supported, or supported well enough to 1300 guarantee that remote attendees can hear. 1302 A.5.1. Face-to-Face Interim Meetings 1304 Many interim meetings are held face-to-face in conference rooms 1305 supplied by companies active in the IETF (and, much less often, in 1306 commercial conference facilities such as hotels). Because these 1307 facilities are not administered by the IETF Secretariat, the ability 1308 to include remote attendees varies widely. Some facilities can 1309 distribute the in-room audio over the Internet just fine, while 1310 others have no or limited abilities to do so. 1312 For example, a recent face-to-face interim meeting was supposed to be 1313 open to remote attendees through WebEx, but the sound coming from the 1314 room was too soft to hear reliably. Even if a face-to-face interim 1315 meeting has good facilities for audio and slide presenting, it will 1316 probably have an experience similar to regular IETF meetings. 1318 A.5.2. Virtual Interim Meetings 1320 Because few WGs have virtual interim meetings (those with no face-to- 1321 face attendees), there is less experience with the tools that are 1322 commonly used for them. The IETF has had free use of WebEx for a few 1323 years, and some WGs have used different tools for audio 1324 participation. For example, some virtual interims are held using 1325 Skype, others with TeamSpeak, and so on. 1327 So far, the experience with virtual interim meetings has been 1328 reasonably good, and some people say that it is better than for 1329 remote attendees at regular IETF meetings and face-to-face interims 1330 because everyone has the same problems with getting the group's 1331 attention. Also, there are no problems getting the in-room audio 1332 into the RPS because all attendees are using their own computers for 1333 speaking to the group. 1335 One of the often-debated aspects of virtual interim meetings is what 1336 time to have them in order to make them available to all attendees. 1337 Such scheduling of virtual interim meetings is out of scope for this 1338 document. However, it is noted that because many attendees will be 1339 attending at different times of day and night, no assumption can be 1340 made that attendees will be at an "office". This debate also affects 1341 face-to-face interim meetings because the meeting hosts normally will 1342 schedule the meeting during business hours at the host company, but 1343 that might be terribly inconvenient for some WG members. 1345 Author's Address 1347 Paul Hoffman 1348 VPN Consortium 1350 Email: paul.hoffman@vpnc.org