Subject: Re: participation in IETF meetings

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:31:53 -0400

I agree with Andy.  It's up to the WG chair to keep the Powerpoints 
constructive and brief.

Andy Bierman <[email-masked]>
10/23/01 02:13 PM

        To:     RJ Atkinson <[email-masked]>
        cc:     [email-masked]
        Subject:        Re: participation in IETF meetings

At 01:10 PM 10/23/2001 -0400, RJ Atkinson wrote:
>At 10:24 23/10/01, Pete Resnick wrote:
> >4. (Up on soapbox again) Do not allow lecture-style presentations in 
> your WG meeting, or at the very least do not let anyone present 
> introductory material which could be posted to the list. These kinds of 
> things encourage people to come to the meeting to try to learn. That's 
> not why we're having these meetings. There should be NO NEW INFORMATION 
> presented at WG meetings. If at least an introduction to the topic has 
> not been written up and posted to the list, discussion of that topic 
> should not be allowed in the WG meeting. The content of a WG meeting 
> should be without surprise.
>
>         The above approach, implemented with commonsense and
>reasonable flexibility for any special cases, would help make the
>in-person IETF meetings much more productive, IMHO.  In the old
>days, before PowerPoint, there weren't so many lecture-style
>presentations -- lots more discussion and scribbling on transparencies
>in real time...

I tend to agree that WG meetings should not be turned into tutorial
sessions for newcomers or observers, but a well-designed slide
presentation can help focus WG discussion, and even speed it up.

I don't let anyone present a 'product pitch'  to the WG, but people 
present
new I-Ds (and new ideas) all the time, using slideware.  The fact is, most 

I-Ds
get posted at the last minute, and most WG members don't read them 
thoroughly
before the meeting. Individual submissions are not required reading 
anyway, and
WG drafts usually start out as individual drafts.

I don't miss the old days when most of the room waited while one person
at the front scribbled unreadable text on a blank transparency, and then
explained it to everyone (because nobody could read it). Powerpoint is
just another tool -- how a WG chooses to use it is up to the WG.

>Entirely IMHO,
>Ran
>[email-masked]

Andy

---

From: "Patil Basavaraj (NET/Dallas)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:45:22 -0500

One thing that we have been using quite effectively the last few
IETFs in the Mobile IP WG is to ask the folks who request timeslots
for presenting some new idea to the WG at the IETF meetings, to
generate enough interest among WG members over the mailing list.
If they canot evince interest in the I-D or convince WG members that
a new feature is really important, we do not (try not to) allocate any
time on the agenda.

---

From: Pete Resnick <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:43:15 -0500

Someone mentioned that this might be good to forward on to bofchairs 
and wgchairs.

--- begin forwarded text

Return-Path: <[email-masked]>
X-Authentication-Warning: ietf.org: majordom set sender to 
[email-masked] using -f
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Eudora [Macintosh version 5.1fc3]
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 09:24:09 -0500
To: [email-masked]
From: Pete Resnick <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: participation in IETF meetings
Sender: [email-masked]

On 10/23/01 at 9:49 AM -0400, RJ Atkinson wrote:

>Many have been the meetings where folks who want to actively 
>participate in that meeting are unable to get in or unable to sit 
>down.

I'm sorry, but I really think this is a problem with the 
person/persons chairing the meeting. If you are the chair of a 
working group whose meeting room is too small, you've got some 
choices:

1. If this happened in the past, you need to ask for a bigger meeting 
room. However, I understand this is not always possible.

2. Before your WG meeting, ask on the mailing list (which all active 
participants should be reading anyway) for all people who are 
planning on attending the meeting and actively participating to send 
you a piece of e-mail. Count. When you get to the room at the 
meeting, count off that many seats in the front rows. Add 10 for 
useful IESG/IAB members. Add a bunch if you know your WG is going to 
have cross-area interest where some people will be attending who 
don't subscribe to the WG list. Cordon off the section with some 
paper signs which read "ACTIVE PARTICIPANTS ONLY". No, it won't stop 
everyone, but it will help things.

3. If people are blocking the door during the meeting, be a traffic 
cop. Go to the door and say, "If you are staying, move in to the 
opposite side of the room away from the door. Otherwise, leave." The 
area behind where the chair usually sits is a fine place to stick 
people. If it gets totally out of hand, you may have to conduct the 
meeting by standing in the door; people who are just loafing hate 
sitting right next to the chairperson anyway.

4. (Up on soapbox again) Do not allow lecture-style presentations in 
your WG meeting, or at the very least do not let anyone present 
introductory material which could be posted to the list. These kinds 
of things encourage people to come to the meeting to try to learn. 
That's not why we're having these meetings. There should be NO NEW 
INFORMATION presented at WG meetings. If at least an introduction to 
the topic has not been written up and posted to the list, discussion 
of that topic should not be allowed in the WG meeting. The content of 
a WG meeting should be without surprise.

Personally, I think this is a fine idea for BOFs too: You're posting 
an agenda before the meeting anyway; make sure any needed information 
is written up and posted before the meeting and make sure that the 
agenda has URLs for that information. Now, I understand that BOFs are 
in a somewhat different position and sometimes there's going to have 
to be presentation of new material in BOF meetings, but that needn't 
always be the case. WGs, of course, have no excuse.

pr

--- end forwarded text

-- 
Pete Resnick <mailto:[email-masked]>
QUALCOMM Incorporated

---

From: Erik Guttman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 08:50:59 +0200 (MET DST)

Speakers should come to the podium with a clear set of problems
to solve and questions to get answered.  How to get there?
WG chairs set this tone and develop this discipline.  Hecklers 
who ask "What's the point?" should be encouraged.

Erik

---

From: RJ Atkinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:37:28 -0400

David,

If you would kindly go read and implement the instructions online at
	ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rja-mua-hints-00.txt
then the rest of us could read your email  because it would be sent
out as plain-text.

	Other users of the same mail application can follow those 
instructions and configure their mail tools not to send out gorpy 
formats that aren't universally readable.  I'd be greatly obliged 
if you could please do the same, at least for mail to IETF mailing lists.

	I am interested in what you have to say -- if only I could
read it.

Thanks,

Ran