Subject: plenary discussion about WG use of meeting space and times

From: Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 20:10:39 +0200

In today's IESG plenary, there was a discussion about how to allocate
meeting time to WGs.  One suggestion made that was quickly taken to task
was that there should be more unstructured time a'la side meetings and
ad hocs.  The reason it was taken to task was that people rightly fear
that dissenters, newcomers, and remote participants would be at a
disadvantage.

There is something of a middle ground here that perhaps could be
explored.  Borrowing from another standards organization, when a
breakout meeting is required, it is announced and all are invited.  That
breakout goes off and usually resolves whatever issue there is and comes
back to the group to explain the result.

One approach, therefore, would be to follow Michael Richardson's
suggestion to shorten WG times, but perhaps provide for announced
breakouts where rooms are assigned, and where AV is available.  Those
meetings might take place at lunch, after dinner, before the first
normal WG meeting of the day, etc.  These ad hocs would focus on a
single task or area.  Multiple ad hocs might occur simultaneously, even
from the same WG.

This idea would clearly require other changes, and would probably cost
money.  But perhaps it's an idea to consider.  The benefit is that those
working on particularly gnarly issues can get some additional time all
together.  The reason that Marc held so many interims was that httpbis
needed more than two hours in a week.

Eliot

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 04:59:12 -0400

> single task or area.  Multiple ad hocs might occur simultaneously, even

This is exactly what I had in mind.
I hadn't thought about the multiple ad-hocs, but for a group like 6man this
would make sense.

I also had some additional notion that if a group needed more than 1hr,
that they would get the 1hr, followed immediately with a 1hr allocation to a
"side" room.
(The side room allocation would ignore all conflicts)
(Some might want more than 1hr, but I think a break makes sense, and an
additional allocation...)

    > needed more than two hours in a week.

yes...

--
Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-