Subject: Re: [113attendees] [Manycouches] Roman Danyliw's Block on charter-ietf-shmoo-01-00: (with BLOCK and COMMENT)

From: Alexandre Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 08:49:17 +0100

Le 20/01/2022 à 01:45, Roman Danyliw via Datatracker wrote on shmoo WG:
> Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for 
> charter-ietf-shmoo-01-00: Block
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to
> all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to
> cut this introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-shmoo/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 
BLOCK:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  Concur with Martin Duke's position.  I don't follow how the IETF has
> sufficient expertise to produce a BCP associated with the generic
> scope of "[m]eeting planning for meetings where special measures are
> required to manage community health due to venue specific
> restrictions and/or to comply with any local health regulations, ..."
> If possible, please be more specific.  For example, what kind of
> decisions would this BCP be intended to support?  The provided 
> examples of "the need for increased spacing, ventilation
> requirements"

Ventilation: have ventilation from down to up.  Do not use horizontal
ventilation, even if that involves filtering (see Dyson) or open window
with a person nearby (see gov't advice) or solely the filtered
ventilation - these are all just apparent help and might be worsening
the covid transmission by projecting the virus horizontally from one
person to another.

That is the ventilation advice.

That advice is my personal advice from personal experience of various
seetings.

That is not implemented in many conference spaces I could look at.  Or
it is not stated as such.  Recently, in the news they say that the
'slaon de l'agriculture' (farms fair) will use 'improved ventilation' in
the end of March.  In August 2021, during my PCR testing, it was in a
room with this kind of vertical ventilation.  Recently, at work office
they distributed ventilators in emergency for all but then they
cancelled and said they should not be used.  I suspect it is because of
that horizontal aspect.

I think IETF might rely on this absence of specification of 'down to up'
ventilation, but that does not mean it is a good thing, even if it comes
from elsewhere.

I agree this is not in scope of IETF competency skillset.

I agree there is large debate about what to be done of this virus (if to
do anything at all, see UK gov't retreat from mandatory covid measures
of yesterday), and myself I do not have necessary formal skillset.

Alex

  seem
> like mitigations suggested by or requirements imposed by entities
> outside of the IETF.
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 
COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  Please provide milestones to cover this new work.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ Manycouches mailing
> list [email-masked] 
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manycouches

---

From: Alexandre Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 14:19:17 +0100

No more than once a week, I promiss!

A paper since August 2021 about ventilation schemes and covid.

https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/177405/

Image