Subject: Re: WG Review: Meeting Venue (mtgvenue)

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 21:28:46 +0300

My comment is that we need to ensure that the selection specification
includes the time of meeting as well (please add in the charer). Also I
want to suggest to add one other specification that makes details of the
way of evaluation of the meeting outcomes. In IETF meetings we need to have
a system that gets feedback of outcomes and will help in the selection
specification. Evaluation methods are alot but we need to find the best
specification to know and to help develop our outcomes and policies. If you
have a best practice evaluation methods then you will have a best practice
meeting-policy and selection specification. Furthermore, in organizations
the evaluation method can change depending on interaction/technology
changes.

Therefore, update:

+++++  old   +++++
The working group shall produce guidance on two areas:

1. A specification of the geographic IETF meeting policy, currently
described as the "1-1-1-*" policy. The policy going forward is up to
the working group.

2. A specification that describes the detailed meeting venue selection
process and criteria, the contents of which are also up to the working
group.

The specification(s) are expected to be Best Current Practice (BCP)
documents. The specifications are expected to provide clear guidance
to meeting selections, be implementable in our operating environment,
and take into account the needs of the highly diverse IETF community.

Milestones:
  Mar 2016 - Initial individual draft on venue selection process and
criteria
  Jul 2016 - Initial individual draft on IETF meeting geographic
distribution policy
  Nov 2016 - Submission of the final working group draft on IETF meeting
geographic distribution policy to the IESG
  Feb 2017 - Submission of the final working group draft on venue
selection process and criteria to the IESG

+++++++  New   ++++++

The working group shall produce guidance on three areas:

1. A specification of the geographic IETF meeting policy, currently
described as the "1-1-1-*" policy. The policy going forward is up to
the working group.

2. A specification that describes the method of evaluating meeting venue
outcomes,
and feedback of participants (both types; attended and remote).

3. A specification that describes the detailed meeting venue selection
process and criteria, the contents of which are also up to the working
group.

The specification(s) are expected to be Best Current Practice (BCP)
documents. The specifications are expected to provide clear guidance
to meeting policy and selection, be implementable in our operating
environment,
and take into account the needs of the highly diverse IETF community.

Milestones:
  Mar 2016 - Initial individual draft on venue selection process and
criteria
  Jul 2016 - Initial individual draft on venue outcomes and
evaluation.
  Jul 2016 - Initial individual draft on IETF meeting geographic
distribution policy
  Nov  2016 - Submission of the final working group draft on venue
  outcome evaluation to the IESG
  Feb 2017 - Submission of the final working group draft on venue
selection process and criteria to the IESG
  Mar 2017 - Submission of the final working group draft on IETF meeting
geographic distribution policy to the IESG

Best Regards
AB

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 7:26 PM, The IESG <[email-masked]> wrote:

> A new IETF WG has been proposed in the General Area. The IESG has not
> made any determination yet. The following draft charter was submitted,
> and is provided for informational purposes only. Please send your
> comments to the IESG mailing list ([email-masked]) by 2016-06-27.
>
> Meeting Venue  (mtgvenue)
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Current status: Proposed WG
>
> Chairs:
>   TBD
>
> Assigned Area Director:
>   Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
>
> General Area Directors:
>   Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
>
> Mailing list:
>   Address: [email-masked]
>   To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue
>   Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=mtgvenue
>
> Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-mtgvenue/
>
> The selection of meeting venues for our physical meetings is a common
> area of discussion at the IETF and feedback for the IAOC and its
> meeting committee.
>
> A specification of the venue selection process and criteria would be
> useful. With community discussion and agreement such a specification
> will be very helpful in improving the process and ensuring that the
> relevant criteria are properly identified.
>
> The discussion itself may also be helpful. For instance, due to recent
> discussions, potential future destinations are announced to the
> community to help identify potential issues early.
>
> These processes and criteria support the overall IETF meeting
> strategy. The IETF complements its mostly online work with three
> physical meetings each year, obviously for the purpose of the
> standards development work but also for the opportunities for
> high-bandwidth collaboration, cross-pollination of ideas, and focusing
> on running code. Existing geographic distribution policy explicitly
> calls for rotating meeting locations equally among the largest sources
> of IETF attendees, previously defined as North America, Europe, and
> Asia, while reserving a possibility for exceptions. The exceptions
> are, for instance, meetings outside those regions. The rationale is to
> meet in different geographic regions in order to spread the difficulty
> and cost of travel among the attendees. The rotation policy, known as
> the 1-1-1-* model -- with the asterisk denoting the exceptions -- was
> set by the IESG, documented in
> https://iaoc.ietf.org/minutes/2010-11-10-iaoc-minutes.txt.
>
> The MTGVENUE working group is the forum where the IETF community can
> discuss and agree on what should go into the policies, the selection
> process, and the detailed criteria going forward. All criteria and all
> other aspects of the process are open for discussion. The purpose of
> the working group is to produce a community consensus document(s) that
> help drive the meeting selection process in a manner that the
> community is comfortable with.
>
> The working group shall produce guidance on two areas:
>
> 1. A specification of the geographic IETF meeting policy, currently
> described as the "1-1-1-*" policy. The policy going forward is up to
> the working group.
>
> 2. A specification that describes the detailed meeting venue selection
> process and criteria, the contents of which are also up to the working
> group.
>
> The specification(s) are expected to be Best Current Practice (BCP)
> documents. The specifications are expected to provide clear guidance
> to meeting selections, be implementable in our operating environment,
> and take into account the needs of the highly diverse IETF community.
>
> Milestones:
>   Mar 2016 - Initial individual draft on venue selection process and
> criteria
>   Jul 2016 - Initial individual draft on IETF meeting geographic
> distribution policy
>   Nov 2016 - Submission of the final working group draft on IETF meeting
> geographic distribution policy to the IESG
>   Feb 2017 - Submission of the final working group draft on venue
> selection process and criteria to the IESG
>
>
>