|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: protocols that don't meet the need...
I agree that attendance is not required, but it can help some discussions. Given the logistical differences it would be much easier to schedule NANOG into a nearby hotel than to try to move the IETF around. For example this time if NANOG had been a month later it would have been in the same city yet different hotels. I understand that synchronized meetings it not trivial, but it is worth considering. Tony > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 1:10 PM > To: Tony Hain > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: protocols that don't meet the need... > > On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 12:35:19 PST, Tony Hain said: > > Rather than sit back and complain about the results, why not try to > > synchronize meeting times. Not necessarily hotels, but within a > reasonable > > distance of each other so the issue about ROI for the trip can be > mitigated. > > The IETF apparently has some major scheduling problems as it is, because > there > are very few venues that can handle the number of people that show up > *and* > have the right mix of large rooms and many smaller break-out rooms. > Trying to get > it into a hotel opposite a NANOG would just exacerbate the problem. > > And there's nothing stopping NANOG types from joining an IETF working > group and > participating via e-mail - there's a large number of people who have > contributed > to the IETF process and never actually been sighted at an IETF meeting.
|