►
From YouTube: IETF112-SHMOO-20211112-1200
Description
SHMOO meeting session at IETF112
2021/11/12 1200
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/112/proceedings/
A
Okay,
so
let's
go
ahead
and
get
started
so
welcome
to
the
smooth
working
group
at
atf112
glad
to
talk
to
you
all
again.
I
was
a
little
bit
surprised.
I
had
to
not
see
like
you
know
too
many
agenda
requests
for
the
hybrid
stuff
since
we're
trying
to
bring
that
into
the
scope
for
the
working
group
with
the
recharging
discussions,
but
we
unfortunately
didn't
get
anything
there.
So
just
like
keep
an
eye
out
like
for
the
recharging
to
bring
the
hybrid
stuff
into
scope.
A
That's
part
of,
like
the
end
of
the
discussion
today,
to
just
show
you
what
are
the
things
that
have
changed
in
the
charter.
What
people
have
proposed
and
we
can
continue
from
there
already?
Can
you
go
to
the
next
slide.
A
This
is
the
regular
note
well
like
you've,
seen
it
all-
probably
it's
friday
morning,
so
you've
probably
seen
it
like
too
many
times
this
week
to
be
happy
about
like
there's
like
this
is
a
summary
of
the
the
apr
stuff
for
the
atf.
Like
you
know,
the
rfcs
in
question
are
like
53,
70
and
81.79.
A
A
Okay,
thanks
mallory
thanks
for
picking
it
up
and
if
anybody
else
can
also
like
you
know,
help
out
mallory
if
she
gets
into
some
discussions
or
something
please.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
So
next
slide,
so
the.
A
Actually,
I
think
I
think,
like
you,
know,
there's
like
some
version
of
the
slide.
I
think
I
didn't
make
a
change
here.
Anyway,
the
remote
meetings
has
been
published
already
and
the
the
remote
fee
draft
is
like
pending
change
of
status.
A
Like
you
know,
it's
supposed
to
change
into
a
bcp,
and
that's
like
going
to
be
part
of
the
discussions
today
to
change
the
charter
to
make
this
a
pcp,
and
we
had
a
leadership
change
like
between
the
last
meeting
and
this
meeting,
like
amelia
decided,
like
you
know,
she
had
like
some
change
in
circumstances
in
her
work
and
like
she
couldn't
dedicate
enough
time
for
this,
so
maldi
came
on
board,
so
thank
you,
mallory
for
stepping
up
and,
like
you
know,
doing
this
job
and
thanks
amelia
for
the
stuff
you've
done
for
us
already.
A
And
so
the
chances
are
the
running
the
idf
hackathon.
It's
like
completed
like
the
working
group
last
call,
and
there
was
like
a
whole
bunch
of
comments
that
came
in
and
and
charles
addressed
them
he's
going
to
summarize
like
what
is
changed
in
the
draft
today
and
also
the
rescue
levin
online
meeting.
A
Like
you
know,
I
haven't
seen
much
like
in
this
thing
so,
like
I
think
this
is
like
going
to
be
something
that's
going
to
come
off
the
the
charter,
if,
like
lars,
so
approves
right,
because
we
haven't
seen
any
drafts
for
this
like
in
the
the
whole
time
we've
been
around
so
next
slide.
A
So
we
have
two
presentations
today.
It's
like
a
pretty
short
agenda
so,
like
we're,
not
gonna
cut
the
mic,
if
at
all
possible,
unless
it
really
runs
into
the
whole
to
ours.
It's
pretty
much
like
you
know,
martin
and
maria
is
gonna
present.
A
First
for
the
online
meeting
organization
draft
and
then
charles
is
going
to
summarize
the
changes
to
the
hackathon
draft
that
have
happened
after
a
working
group
last
call
and
then
we're
going
to
like
push
for
along
with
it,
like
mallory,
is
going
to
be
shepherding
the
document
through
and
we'll
move
further
and
the
rechargers
of
what
like
we've
done
is
like
maldi
and
I
have
gone
through
all
the
comments
that
came
in
and
during
the
recharger
proposal,
and
so
we
made
like
all
the
errors
that
are
required.
A
So
I
think
the
last
one
came
in
from
myria
to
address
like
a
comment
michael
richardson
made,
and
that
has
been
accommodated.
I
think
it
was
a
couple
of
days
ago
that
media
put
in
so
after
that
we
haven't
seen
any
changes,
so
we
have
pretty
much
like
you
know,
included
all
the
changes
in
there
and
I'm
going
to
send
the
mail
to
the
working
group
mailing
list
with
all
the
kind
of
changes,
because
it's
done
in
a
google
doc.
It's
kind
of
very
hard
to
like
do
all
the
like.
A
Divs
in
there,
but
I
can
actually
run
through
the
stuff
at
the
end
of
the
meeting
to
actually
walk
through
the
document
and
just
show
you
what
has
changed
and
then
at
some
point
we
need
to
ship
it
off
the
lars,
because
it's
something
like
I
hadn't,
appreciated
very
much,
but
the
the
recharger
doesn't
happen
until
we
have
a
charter
to
put
up.
So
there's
no
way
to
put
something
up
as
a
chair
to
do
it
other
than
going
to
the
80
and
asking
them
to
put
up
a
straw
man
in
there.
A
So
the
the
goal
would
be
after,
like
you
know,
a
reasonable
cool
off
time.
After
all,
the
changes
are
resolved
now
to
ship
it
off
to
lars
to
kick
off
the
recharge
process.
Last.
B
C
Hey
yeah,
not
really
so
I
was
waiting
for
it
for
the
last
bullet
point
there,
but,
but
since
you
mentioned
it,
so
I'm
I'm
actually
totally
fine
of
having
a
small
charter
right.
If
there's
work
items
that
the
group
has
sort
of
lost
energy
on,
I
don't
see
that
as
a
failure.
I
think
I
I
see
that
as
a
chance
to
eliminate
some
things.
C
So
so
nobody
should
like
feel
that
they
need
to
write
a
draft
just
because
we
have
like
work
that
hasn't
been
seen
in
the
action
for
a
couple
of
years
right,
if
we're,
okay
with
dropping
it,
I'm
okay
with
dropping
it
I'd
much
rather
give
give
guidance.
That's
actually
going
to
be
helpful.
A
If
not,
let's
switch
to
martin
and
media,
so
we
we
don't
have
any
slides
from
you.
Did
I
get
that
right?
Mutton
on
media.
E
E
E
E
I
think
this
the
hackathon
draft
is
loaded
twice.
That's
what
I'm
seeing.
D
There
they're
processing
tracker
they've
been
processing
for
a
while,
so
I
don't
know
if
that's
because
they're
really
large,
you
can
also
do
a
screen
share
if
you'd
rather
so
yeah,
I
processed
them
immediately,
but
they're
still
showing
for
me
as
processing.
So
it
could
just
be
the
file
as
large
or
something.
E
Okay,
I
have,
I
have
a
sharing
request
up
that
I
think
needs
approval.
E
C
E
So
the
purpose
the
strap
that
near-
and
I
wrote
it's
just
about
you-
know
kind
of
how
you
set
up
an
online
meeting,
it's
kind
of
just
a
guide
to
all
of
those
things,
and
it
covers
a
lot
of
the
for
lack
of
a
better
word
traditions.
We
developed
over
the
past
year
and
a
half.
I
don't
think
any
of
this
would
be
a
big
surprise
to
anyone.
E
E
So,
after
a
lot
of
discussion,
one
or
two
meetings
ago
we
settled
on,
I
thought
there
was
pretty
good
consensus
in
the
room
to
for
any
given
meeting,
not
optimized
for
a
particular
time
zone,
but
try
to
optimize
for
two
time
zones
so
that
in
any
given
three
meaning
rotation,
one
of
the
one
of
the
like
official
regions
would
only
really
have
an
awful
meeting
slot
once
per
year.
E
So
this
is
the
one
where
that
suffers,
and
then
the
other
of
the
other
two
regions,
one
is
like
having
one
start
about
breakfast
and
having
one
start,
the
other
one
and
the
third
one
is
having
the
meeting
start
about
dinner
time
or
so,
and
then,
like
the
truly
like
you
know,
graveyard
shift
hours
are,
are
only
happen
once
a
year,
so
you
can
see
those
times,
I'm
going
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
scoring
in
a
minute,
but
I,
but
we
did
mention
before,
like
a
sort
of
scoring
system
for
various
time
zones
and
the
hours
in
which
a
given
utc
start
time
would
occur,
and
after
some
messing
around
with
that,
these
are
the
these
are
the
times
we
came
up
with
and
what
are
currently
in
the
draft.
E
E
Once
we
move
to
this
knight
based
concept,
we
also
had
to
revise
the
rules
for
selection,
so
that
table
there,
which
is
in
the
draft
in
the
lower
right
is,
is
a
very
complicated
way
of
saying
that,
basically,
whatever
whatever
time
zone
had
a
fairly
favorable
time
slot
before,
like
you're,
the
one
that's
going
to
be
in
the
night,
if
it's
an
online
meeting
and
it
kind
of
covers
all
the
permutations
of
having
previous
online
meetings
for
in-person
meetings
according
to
this
framework.
E
E
Okay.
This
is
the
final
scoring
system
early
fi.
You
know
current
scoring
system,
I
should
say
so
dear
and
I
talked
about
this
a
little
bit
and
we
assigned
kind
of
pain,
points
for
hours,
0.05
being
the
worst
and
then
kind
of
the
one
shoulder
hour
there
our
two
points
and
then.
E
So
there's
there's
one
there's
one
time
slot
of
the
three
where
you're
just
gonna
get
it
just
it's
gonna
be
very
inconvenient
and
then,
if
we
can
make
the
second
one
painless
according
to
the
scoring
system,
that's
a
that's
a
pretty
good
outcome
or
come
as
close
to
that
as
we
can
do
for
asia.
We
just
took
sydney,
japan,
china
and
india.
E
As
sort
of
I
mean,
I
think
it's
it's
just
a
sort
of
sample
of
representative
time
zones
that
that
are
relevant
to
itf
and
we
we
took
the
medians
for
each
of
those
times.
Those
are
the
simple
mean
of
those
four.
India
is
really
quite
an
outlier
in
terms
of
times
relative
to
because
kind
of,
as
everyone
knows,
is
kind
of
between
asia
and
or
east
asia
and
europe.
E
So
that
turns
out
to
be
a
little
odd
in
terms
of
scoring,
but
nevertheless
that's
what
we
did
with
europe.
We
just
used
cet.
Of
course,
there's
only
there's,
you
know
fewer
time
zones
in
europe
than
most
other
places
and
in
north
america
we
just
took
the
eastern
and
pacific
time
zones
and
just
did
a
did
a
simple
mean
of
those
two
to
to
and
minimize
that,
so
you
might
be
wondering
what
those
thoughts
mean
for
you.
E
We've
done
the
math
for
you
here
so,
given
what
we
have
in
the
draft
for
utc
times.
This
is
what
it
means
for
you,
or
at
least
you
can
figure
out
what
it
means
for
you,
based
on
the
time
zones.
You
see
here.
E
And
that's
that
there's
no
other
changes
since
my
last
talk
on
this
mira.
Do
you
have
anything
to
add.
G
Yeah
there,
actually,
there
were
a
few
more
changes,
but
most
of
them
were
actually
structural
and
editorial,
and
then
there
was
a
little
bit
more
discussion
added
based
on
okay.
E
I
guess
she
has
nothing
to
add
unless
my
audio
is
broken,
so
I
guess
the
question
is:
is
this
ready
for
adoption
or
do
people?
Are
people
not
happy
with
the
general
direction
of
this
draft?
A
Media
did
say
something
so
we
could
hear
her.
I'm.
E
Apparently,
having
some
audio
problems
and
I'm
not
hearing.
E
Things
to
answer.
E
Meaning
does
not
fall
into
these
slots
in
one
of
these
slots.
The
isg's
sort
of
emergent
habit
has
been
to
schedule
it
at
1200
or
1300
local
time
in
the
absence
of
any
sort
of
consensus
document.
So
I
I
I'm
fairly
optimistic
113
will
be
in
person
in
some
sense,
but
if,
for
some
reason
it
isn't,
and
if
this
moves
quickly,
we
might
use
this
as
a
framework
instead
of
the
the
existing
tradition.
E
All
right,
great
I'll
answer
the
question
to
chat,
since
I
can't
seem
to
hear
anybody
for
some
reason.
Just
tell
me
in
the
chat.
If
I
need
to
be
quiet,
because
someone
else
is
talking
thoughts
on
hybrid
timing,
I
don't
well.
This
draft
doesn't
really
address
that.
I
think
in
practice
we
will
have
to
at
least
do
it
during
the
day
of.
G
E
Of
the
of
the
the
the
host
venue,
but
for
no
reason
for
the
actual
support
staff
to
be
able
to
do
that
as
for
what
specific
time
of
day
it
will
be
like
I'm
there's
been,
there
have
been
no
discussions
about
that
and
this.
This
draft
is
not
on
that
topic
at
all.
E
G
Yep,
hey
yeah,
then
let
me
talk
first
thing,
so
this
draft
had
some
more
editorial
changes,
a
little
bit
of
restructuring
and
there's
a
new
section
on
some
considerations
about
how
to
use
the
online
time
not
flexible,
because
we
don't
necessarily
have
to
squeeze
everything
into
one
week,
but
it
doesn't
give
a
clear
recommendation.
It's
just
a
discussion
about
what
the
options
are.
So
that's
the
other
thing
that
was
added
can.
A
Hey
nobody
say
maria,
just
a
quick
question
for
you,
like
not
related
to
the
schmo
itself
right,
but
like
this
experiment
of
the
two
week
thing.
Are
you
planning
to
have
some
kind
of
survey
or
something
afterwards
to
figure
out
from
the
people?
What
they
thought
is
that
the
plan.
G
I
mean
martin
could
could
answer
this
as
well,
because
he
wrote
the
text
about
the
experiment.
I
think
the
email
is
very
clear
that
we
have
some
evaluation
criteria
there,
and
so
there
is
a
survey
included,
there's
some
data
we
want
to
look
at
and
we
will
send
out
this
evaluation
after
the
meeting
for
more
discussion.
G
H
Okay:
okay,
I
have
no
camera
yeah,
so
the
question
was
whether
this
direction
of
considering
four
slots
instead
of
three
slots
has
been
considered.
H
No,
no
okay!
So
there
is
a
number
three
in
this
in
this
draft
right.
So,
instead
of
three
to
make
it
four.
E
Well,
so
there
there
are
three,
the
rfc
number,
which
79
something
I
can't
remember.
All
of
a
sudden
specifies
three
regions
in
which
we
consider
hosting
meetings,
asia,
europe
and
north
america,
and
our
intent
here
in
this
in
this
system
is
to
keep
a
fair
balance
between
those
three
regions.
So
what
so?
I'm
I
mean
I
was
a
little
verbally
sloppy
and
assuming
that
there
were
three
meetings
per
year
in
principle,
you
could
have
any
number
of
meetings
periods
to
use
this
algorithm.
But
the
point
is
the
point
is
to
balance
the
time.
H
Okay,
to
clarify
myself
three
meetings
per
year,
but
sly
cycling
through
four
time
zones,
not
time
slots,
but
time
zones;
okay,.
E
G
E
H
G
H
Yeah,
okay,
yeah,
so.
H
I
To
the
slide,
and
maybe
just
walk
us
through
the
chart
that
you
did
because
I
don't
actually
know
how
to
read
the
chart,
I
could
probably
sit
down
and
figure
it
out
over.
You
know
I
could
spend
15
minutes
trying
to
reverse
engineer
it,
but
it
would
be
nice
if
you
guys,
since
you
already
know
how
it
works,
but
just
sort
of
explain
it
to
us
sure.
E
There
we
go
okay,
so
again
in
the
draft.
There
are
three
slots
per
season
listed.
So
that's
on
the
far
left
here
you
have.
You
know
the
utc
times
that
that
are
on
the
previous
slide
and
then
for
any
given
time
zone.
If
any
meeting
that
in
that
is
in
the
northern
winter,
so
so
take
the
example
of
cet.
E
So
in
the
northern
winter
a
meeting
would
start
at
either
seven
o'clock
local
time,
three
p.m,
local
time
or
11
p.m.
Local
time
in
the
northern
summer,
cet
meetings
would
start
at
seven
o'clock,
3
p.m
or
or
midnight
local
time.
E
E
J
E
K
I
just
sort
of
picking
up
the
this
discussion
from
the
chat,
I
think
for
scoring
purposes.
You
could
conceivably
just
responding
to
the
point
from
alex
earlier
alternate
the
asia
pack
time
zone
so
rather
than
taking
a
medium
because
it
is
so
wise
you,
you
could
even
alternate
between,
say,
india,
and
I
mean
I
was
put
in
the
chat,
maybe
japan,
but
you
I
mean
you
could
pick
randomly
someplace
on
the
other
side
towards
the
other
side
of
the
region.
K
I
I
suspect,
whatever
whatever
algorithm
you
use,
so
you
could
make
the
scoring
more
sophisticated,
but
I'm
not
sure
you
actually
end
up
with
with
any
better
answer
the
the
the
than
you
have,
because
it's
gonna
have
to
share
the
pain.
Somehow
yeah.
E
We
certainly
we've
certainly
played
with
it
a
little
bit.
I
don't
if
someone
has
a
very
compelling
case
that
a
particular
scoring
system
other
than
what
we
did
is
like,
is
absolutely
the
right
way
to
do
this,
then
then
I'd
be
open
to
that,
but
stickering
with
us
is
not
going
to
get
us
very
far.
It.
E
To
say
that
we
have
a
what
I
think
is
in
the
chat
and
there's
a
there's,
a
theme
here
that
maybe
when
we
do
the
well,
I'm
not
sure
how
it
would
work.
Actually
I
I
guess
if
in
the
north
american
night
and
the
europe
night
slots,
if
the
asian
slot
maybe
sometimes
tried
to
minimize
the
pain
for
india
and
sometimes
tried
to
minimize
the
pain
for
for
japan,
that
is
a
little
bit
hard
to
work
through.
E
G
So
I
think
you
can
make
the
scoring
scheme
as
complicated
as
you
want.
You
can
add
more
stuff
and
I'm
not
sure
if
the
result
would
change
from
that.
As
I
said,
the
optimization
criteria
is
really
to
only
have
one
slot.
That
is
really
bad,
which
means
the
other
two
slots
are
probably
doable,
but
also
not
the
best
slot
you
can
get.
That's
that's
the
the
main
criteria
and
like
for
yourself.
G
I
think
you
should
look
at
what
time
zone
you're
in
and
if
the
times
for
you
are
somehow
acceptable
and
that's
also
what
we
did
and
like
we
phone
and
and
this
what
we
suggest
seems
to
be
for
all
time
zones.
We
we
considered
that
the
spots
seem
to
be
acceptable.
There's
one
thing
about
india
might
suffer
slightly
more
than
the
other
time
zones,
but
there's
no
perfect
solution.
E
Well
so
I
do
want
to
like,
I
I
think
it's
a
little
more
subtle
than
that
india,
india
is
experiencing
something
more
like
a
lot
of
us
are
experiencing
during
this
current
tempo,
which
is
that,
like
there
are
two
slots
that
are
kind
of
bad,
so
you're,
you
know
there's
one
where
you
go
to
bed
at
two
and
there's
one
I
mean
we
could
look
at
the
you
look
at
the
slide
presentation
again,
but
there's
there
are
two
like
moderately
painful
slots.
E
Instead
of
one
that's
horrible
and
then
the
two
other
two
are
fine,
so
you
know
ages,
big
as
as
you
may
not
know,
and
this
is
a
hard
problem,
but
that's
kind
of
where
we
ended
up.
A
Thanks,
martin
thanks
maria,
so
so
you,
you
folks,
think
it's
ready
for
the
draft
is
ready
for
adoption.
E
Okay,
I
think
so
I
mean
we
can
certainly
have
we
can.
I
would
I'm
open
to
another
discussion
about
maybe
doing
something
creative
with
this,
the
breadth
of
asia
as
long
as
it's
as
long
as
it's
kind
of
done
within
asia
and
doesn't
mess
the
balance
between
the
three
regions.
I
think
that
would
be
perfectly
fine,
but
you
know
how
that
works
is
not
obvious
and
that
would
require
discussion,
but
that
shouldn't
block
adoption,
in
my
view,.
A
Yeah,
so
that
can
be
part
of
the
working
group
process.
Martin
luther
we
decided
to
do
something
so
so
what
we
can
do
is
we
can
get
a
adoption
call
kicked
off
next
week.
Yeah
like
I,
I
think
it's
like
we
seen
generally
possible
stuff,
but
I'm
sure
there's
like
other
stuff.
That's
gonna
come
up,
so
we
can
handle
it
during
the
working
group
stages
of
the
craft.
That's
okay,.
E
Yeah,
oh
and
just
for
people's
information,
so
the
india
time
slots
are
11
00
in
the
morning
to
5
pm,
which
is
the
best
one,
7
p.m
to
1
a.m,
which
is
pretty
bad
and
then
3
a.m
to
9
a.m,
which,
in
my
view,
is
really
bad,
but
I
mean
you
can
sort
of
see
the
dynamics
of
that.
It's
it's
not
quite
an
overnight
shift.
G
And
I
would
like
to
reply
to
this
idea
of
having
four
time
slots
which
are
each
five
hours
apart.
I
don't
think
that
will
solve
the
problem,
because
that
just
means
that
you
have
to
suffer
in
more
of
these
time
slots.
So
currently
we
have
three
time
slots,
so
hopefully
you
you,
wherever
you
are,
have
to
only
suffer
really
badly
for
one
of
them.
Instead
of
for
two
or
more,
that's
the
that's
the
goal
here,
I
don't
think
adding
more
time.
Slot
will
make
it
better.
G
I
mean
like
if
there's
another
proposal,
I'm
happy
to
consider
it
but,
like
we
have
been
thinking
about
this
so
much
and
and
really
check
your
time
zone
and
see
if
this
is
acceptable
for
you
and
let's
move
on.
A
Okay,
thanks
peter
nick
go
ahead.
L
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
change
the
topic
a
little
bit
to
there.
There
wasn't
as
much
advice
in
this
draft,
and
it
has
been
a
sort
of
active
question
on
sort
of
attendee
lists
about
about
how
to
handle
socializing
among
itf
participants,
but
I
don't
know
what
it
is
like
for
other
people.
I
think
I'm
still
struggling
with
that.
I
haven't
always
made
it
to
the
gather
things,
I'm
not
quite
sure
how
to
use
it.
L
G
So
the
draft
does
mention
that
you
know
there
is.
There
is
a
little
bit
of
a
trade-off
between
online
meetings
are
more
open,
it's
more
easier
to
participate
in
general
in
the
meeting,
but
you're
missing
out
the
social
component.
So
there's
a
discussion
about
that
and
the
draft
generally
encourages
people
to
experiment
with
things,
but
I
don't
have
a
good
solution.
I
don't
have
a
great
proposal,
so
I
don't
know
what
what
else
to
add
to
the
draft
but
proposal
welcome.
E
I
mean
we
can,
if
somebody
would
want
to
suggest
some
text,
that
kind
of
hits
it
again
like
space.
I'm
I'm
perfectly
open
to
that.
I
do
think
they're
fundamental
limitations
when
you're
at
home
when
it
might
be
a
bad
time
time
zone
or
you
know
there
are
other
things.
I
think
it's
harder
to
get
people
to
just
go
socialize
because
they
have
you
know
other
things
to
do,
whereas
when
you're
at
the
hotel,
you
have
nothing
to
do
but
but
go
interact
with
your
fellow
attendees.
E
It's
probably
a
fundamental
limitation
in
my
view,
but
but
yeah.
I
think,
if
there's
any
sort
of
tooling
I'm
not
I'm
not
opposed
to
having
a
section
in
the
draft,
but
I'm
not
sure
what
that
would
say.
L
To
be
clear,
I
I
agree
that
it's
hard,
I
wasn't
saying
oh,
this
is
easy.
You
should
answer
it
but
yeah,
but
I
also
sort
of
wonder
if,
like
maybe
we
should
say
like
it,
is
going
to
be
hard
and
we
should
try
to
force
it
a
little
bit
because
otherwise
people
won't
do
it.
A
Yeah,
I
I
think,
like
you
know
it's
one
thing
to
say
like
hey:
we
need
to
have
a
mechanism
and
the
other
one
is
to
force
like.
I
think
I
have
the
same
problem.
Like
you
know,
media
was
stating
right
like
it's
the
when
something
is
online
and
offset
from
your
time
zone.
It's
gonna
be
very
hard
to
find
the
time
so
like
I
greatly
appreciate
some
text
input
there
nick.
Thank
you.
G
Yeah
so,
as
I
said,
there
is
text
saying
socializing
is
a
problem.
We
see
this
because
the
zero
drafts,
for
example,
going
down
and
the
text
currently
says
this-
should
be
considered
right.
It
doesn't
say
more
than
that,
so
like
look
at
x,
section
four
three
and
if
you
have
additional
wording,
please
propose
it:
yeah,
okay,.
A
Thanks
lars
go
ahead,.
C
Yeah
two
points
on
that
same
time
for
that
nick
race.
So
so
I
on
this
meeting
and
also
with
last
week
for
me
personally,
the
half
hour
breaks
are
sort
of
too
short
and
too
long
at
the
same
time,
in
some
sense
that
they're
long
enough
that
I
do
some
other
things.
But
then
I
don't
have
time
to
hang
out
on
gather.
If
it's
a
15-minute
break,
I
think
I'm
sort
of
more
more
happy
to
drop
in,
but
this
is
sort
of
the
worst
of
both
worlds.
C
So
I'm
kind
of
wondering
if
we
should
sort
of
as
an
option
describe
you
know
having
a
one-hour
break
at
some
point
during
that
meeting,
so
that
you
know
you
can
eat
something
and
and
then
still
have
some
time
together
for
those
of
us
who
don't
like
to
eat
in
front
of
the
screen,
but
that's
sort
of
just
a
minor
suggestion.
The
other
thing
I
wanted
to
suggest
is
a
little
bit.
G
Earthquake
are
you
proposing,
then,
because
the
draft
also
says
you:
we
shouldn't
extend
the
day
more
than
six
hours,
so
are
you
proposing
to
actually
accept
the
day
or
just
using
well.
C
I
guess
it
would
have
to
be
excited
because
I
don't
think
we
can
eat
into
the
working
room
and
I
totally
get
the
time
the
the
trade-off
here
right,
if
you're
in
the
middle
of
the
night,
a
one-hour
break
is
pretty
you
know
useless,
but
if
you're
not
it's
sort
of
quite
helpful,
but
you
know,
there's
no.
Somebody
said
in
the
chat
right
there,
there's
no
good
solutions.
G
C
The
other
thing
I
think
I
wanted
to
sort
of
bring
up
is
that
this
is
about
fully
online
meetings
and
and
we're
hopefully
going
to
go
towards
hybrid
meetings,
so
people
should
think
a
little
bit
about
maybe
discuss
it
on
the
mailing
list.
What
what
guidance
we
want
to
give
the
guidance
like
this
hybrid
meetings,
so
so,
for
example,
do
we
wanna,
you
know,
stick
to
this
rotation
or
use
this
algorithm
to
schedule
the
working
group
sessions
during
the
day
for
a
hybrid
meeting?
C
Do
we
wanna,
like
do
the
start
at
lunch
thing?
Do
we
want
to
think
about
having
some
flexibility
in
terms
of
catering
to
the
people
on
site,
but
also
not
making
it
terrible
needlessly
for
for
people
elsewhere?
What
what
do
we
want
to
do
in
terms
of
the
length
of
the
day?
Are
we
okay
with
going
slightly
longer
for
working
group
sessions
or
not?
C
J
M
I
mentioned
in
the
chat
room
and-
and
I
think
it
might
be
worth
saying
something
along
these
lines
in
the
document
that
my
my
use
for
the
past
two
meetings
has
been
for
gather
to
be
the
sort
of
home
base
for
me,
and
I
use
the
little
doors
to
go
into
the
sessions
and
to
meet
echo,
and
maybe
some
mention
of
experimenting
around
the
idea
of
having
the
social
space
be
the
primary
space
and
you
go
into
the
meeting
sessions
as
a
potential
way
to
increase
the
social
interactions
between
sessions
and
to
get
people
into
the
habit
of
switching
between
rooms,
for
instance,
to
check
out
other
sessions
because
that's
become
useful.
M
I
can
step
in
and
go
no
really
not
or
I
can
step
in
and
say,
hey,
not
something
that
I
normally
would
go
to,
but
there
it
is
up
on
the
screen
and
I've
been
curious
about
it
and
step
into
a
room
and
not
specifying
gather
but
specifying
tools
that
are
around
socialization
and
cross-area
interactions
in
rooms.
Something
along
those
lines
might
be
useful
to
point
out
as
a
good
part
of
the
experiment.
M
And
you
know
we
can't
push
a
particular
one
in
in
the
draft.
I
don't
think
that's
useful,
I
think,
giving
the
example
is
possible,
but
just
to
sort
of
center
people
around
the
idea
of.
Maybe
we
have
to
think
about
the
general
approach
to
tooling.
Do
we
want
it
to
be
centered
around
sessions?
Do
we
want
to
be
centered
around
social
aspects
and
maybe
more
integrate?
I
thought
the
integration
so
far
has
been
really
good
if
you
start
by
using
gather
so
some
discussion
about
what
we've
seen
so
far.
E
Yeah
jay
did
we
were
kicking
at
one
point.
The
idea
of
beat
echo
deliberately
kicking
you
in
together
when
you
left
a
session,
I'm
not
sure
what
happened
with
that,
because
I
know
that
was
an
intent.
Maybe
it
just
turned
out
to
be
a
problem
for
some
reason.
A
E
D
Kind
of
I
kind
of
remember
this,
I'm
already
in
the
queue,
so
I
remember
it
on
the
list,
and
so
my
use
case,
especially
in
irtf,
is
we
have
a
lot
of
day
passers
and
a
lot
of
like
invited
speakers,
and
it
would
create
a
really
unnecessary
speed
bump
because
they're
already
struggling
to
use
the
tool
for
the
first
time
to
get
on
the
agenda
to
get
in
the
room,
and
so,
if
you're,
forcing
them
into
these
other
things
that
are
out
of
band
for
them,
because
they're
not
trying
to
socialize.
D
That
could
be
a
problem,
and
so
then,
of
course,
you'd
have
to
create
an
alternative
where
you
could
just
dip
in
based
on
the
agenda
and
then
that's
what
everybody
would
use.
So
you
lose
that
sort
of
you
know:
you're
centering
everybody,
because
they'll
they'll
use
what
works
for
them
and
it
probably
won't
be
gathered.
G
Yeah,
I
don't
think
so.
I
don't
think
any
of
these
considerations
belong
into
this
draft.
Actually
because
it's
really
more
about
two
links,
maybe
it
would
be
a
separate
draft,
but
if
people
think
something
should
go
into
this
draft,
then
please
let
us
know.
D
I
was
in
the
queue
for
a
different
point
around
social
stuff
that
maybe
we
could
say
so
one
thing
that
might
work
well
but
would
require
a
bit
of
decentral
organization.
We
couldn't
really
prescribe
it.
We
could
suggest
it.
It
would
also
probably
require
a
bit
of
sponsorship
is
to
have
local
meetings
in
fa
like
face-to-face
where
there
are
lots
of
people
that
live
like
in
dc,
for
example,
or
san
francisco,
paris
or
places
where
you
actually
do
have
a
community
of
ietfers.
D
G
So
I
mean
I
think
this
is
the
original
idea
that
was
brought
up
when
the
many
coaches
list
was
actually
created,
but
the
idea
never
really
got
so
far
to
the
point
that
people
actually
organized
it.
So
I
would,
I
would
be
I
mean
encouraging.
That
is
maybe
a
good
idea,
but
it
would
be
nice
to
actually
see
some
experience
with
it.
G
A
D
A
Okay,
I
think
the
dead
is
next
on
the
line.
I
This
is
the
boston
pub
meeting.
I
went
to
them
pretty
religiously.
While
they
were
happening,
they
were
kind
of
hard
to
organize.
There
was
a
there
was
like
not
quite
the
right
amount
of
energy
to
make
it
happen
consistently,
and
also
the
fact
that
it
was
asynchronous
with
iatf
meant
that
you
know
people
had
to
come
up
with
sort
of
off
off
ietf
presentations,
which
meant
that
it
was
actually
a
bunch
of
extra
work
that
you
had
to
do
so.
I
So
I
think,
trying
to
figure
out
a
way
to
make
those
meetings
synergize
with
iatf,
rather
than
sort
of
be
additional
to
ietf,
might
be
helpful,
and
I
think
you
know
I
have
to
say
I
definitely
enjoyed
getting
together
with
ietf
people
in
the
boston
area.
There
was,
there
were
plenty
of
people,
we
had.
You
know
great
socialization,
so
so
in
that
sense
it
was
good.
It's
just
that
the
amount
of
work
that
was
involved
in
prepping.
I
G
Was
what
would
be
helpful
for
me
is
to
understand
like
how
those
meetings
were
actually
organized,
because
I've
never
been
at
one
right
was
the
meeting
during
the
itf
week?
Was
it
before?
What
kind
of
presentations
did
you
have?
Did
you
have
a
social
component
on
these
kind
of
events
would
be
probably.
I
Yeah
so
so
these
were
interim
meetings
essentially,
except
that
they
weren't
working
group
meetings.
They
were
just
like
people
get
together
and
the
presentations
were
just
so.
We'd
have
something
to
talk
about
like
what
are
people
working
on
you
know,
so
so
you
know
doing
it
sort
of
at
the
same
time
as
the
itf
might
work
well.
Actually,
but
the
problem
is
that,
then
you
need
an
actual
venue
like
we
were
basically
getting
spaces
loaned
by
various
companies
and
to
do
that
for
an
entire
week
would
be
like
pretty
hard,
so
yeah.
I
I
Okay
yeah,
so
the
thing
that
I
wanted
to
to
talk
about
is
that
is
that
you
just
got
a
whole
bunch
of
questions
that
basically
boil
down
to
the
thing
that
we're
taking
off
of
the
charter,
which
is
tooling
right.
So
so,
basically,
all
these
questions
about
meat,
echo
or
whatever
the
social
thing
is,
are
really
questions
about.
What's
the
right
tool
to
solve
the
problem,
at
least
I'm
going
to
claim
that
that's
what
they're
about
and
the
reason
I
claim
that
that's
what
they're
about
is
that
it
was
really
interesting.
I
Listening
to
pete
talk
about
the
way
that
he's
engaging
with
the
itf
and
contrasting
that,
with
the
way
that
I'm
engaging
with
the
ietf
in
these
weird
times,
because
the
way
I'm
engaging
with
the
itf
in
these
weird
times
is
that
itf
meetings
have
just
become
new
meetings
on
my
schedule.
I
There's
no
longer
an
ietf
event,
except
that
the
week
of
ietf
is
like
super
busy
for
me,
because
I
have
so
many
extra
meetings
and
that's
very
different
than
the
way
that
I
engaged
with
the
itf.
When
I
was
going
to
the
itf
in
person
when
I
went
to
the
itf
in
person,
if
I
had
to
take
a
work
meeting,
that
was
like
a
big
imposition
on
my
itf
schedule.
Now
it's
exactly
the
opposite,
and
I
think
that
that
you
know
some
folks.
I
Probably
the
people
who
show
up
for
for
gather
are
trying
to
replicate
trying
to
continue
the
experience
that
they
had
with
with
in
person
its
so
like.
I
miss
the
things
that
I
got
out
of
the
in-person
ietf
in
terms
of
socialization,
but
gather
isn't
solving
that
problem.
I
For
me,
the
problem
with
gather
is
that
I
have
to
go
together
and
I
have
to
be
there
in
order
to
actually
interact
with
people
and
because
it's
it's
optional
and
because
I've
got
other
stuff
going
on
it
it
just
it's
not
the
right
thing
like
it
would
be
nice
to
have
a
way
that
we
could
that
we
could
have
a
sort
of
impromptu
discussions
forum
that.
I
That
replicates
what
what
we
did
in
I-techs
in
ietf
in
person
meetings.
The
way
that
that
side
meetings,
often
formed,
was
sort
of
by
happenstance
you'd
walk
by
somebody.
You
think,
oh
right,
I
need
to
talk
to
them
about
this
thing.
We
don't
have
that
anymore,
and
I
don't
think
that
gather
really
does
that,
because
you
kind
of
have
to
be
able
to
spend
like
a
bunch
of
time
and
gather
to
make
that
work
and
it's
hard
to
justify
spending
that
time.
I
So
it
would
be
kind
of
nice
if
there
was
like
a
much
lower
cost
way
to
to
be
sort
of
in
the
same
room
with
everybody,
rather
than
gather
like
personally
like
if
jabber
was
a
little
bit
more
functional.
I'd
say:
let's
just
have
a
jabber
room,
that's
like
where
everybody
is
between
sessions
and
like.
G
J
G
Itf
is
also
working
on
or
the
tools
team
basic
is
working
on
to
going
away
from
jabba
and
using
other
chat
tools
where
you
have
more
this
kind
of
channel
kind
of
set
up
on
and
might
make
it
easier
to
connect
to
people
directly
in
these
kind
of
things.
So
there
is
work
in
progress
there,
I'm
not
disagreeing
with
you
at
all,
but
talking
about
the
charter.
G
J
G
Level
things
it's
not
useful
to
have
an
rsc
for
more
high
level
consideration
requirements.
What
you
were
talking
about
this
might
be
useful,
but
we
need
to
think
more
about
it
and
we
need
more
discussion
about
it.
I
G
G
This
kind
of
high
level
requirements
about
how
to
improve
socializing.
This
might
still
be
in
scope.
I
mean
check
that
out
just
got
a
charter,
but
the
first
step
is
really
writing
a
draft
that
that
forces
discussion
and
that
might
help
us
to
make
progress.
A
So
I
think,
okay,
I
think
I
probably
have
to
call
back.
K
Should
I
speak
whilst
was
he's
sure?
Okay
well,
just
reflect
on
the
last
conversation
I'll
get
to
the
three
points
I
wanted
to
make.
I
I
think
the
fundamental
problem
with
the
socialization
thing
remotely
is
we're
all
remote
and
yeah.
You
can't
do
things
you
would
do
in
socialization
like
drink
beer
or
you
can,
but
drinking
beer
by
yourself
is
a
bit
sort
of
sad
and
not
quite
the
same
and
depending
on
what
time
zone
you're
in
you're,
maybe
not
sleeping
in
order
to
socialize
and
so
on.
K
So
I
yeah
this
may
be
the
wrong
venue
to
say
this,
but
I
think
actually
completely
replicating
the
whole
of
the
in-person
experience
with
the
remote
meeting
is
probably
impossible.
K
K
The
the
other
comments
then
just
pick
up
the
things
I
wanted
to
to
to
then
cover
someone
pose
a
question,
possibly
martin
about.
When
we
go
to
hybrid
meetings,
should
we
use
the
time
zones
in
this
paper?
I
think
that's
a
horrible
thing
to
do.
K
I
think
when
we
go
to
hybrid
meetings,
we
surely
have
to
use
the
the
the
model
of
the
time
zone
where
the
meeting
is
actually
happening
in
person,
because
otherwise,
if
you
think
about
it,
we're
asking
people
to
pay
extra
to
be
there
in
person
to
have
a
dumbed-down
experience
to
suit
the
people
that
aren't
there
in
person.
I
think
that
doesn't
make
a
great
deal
of
sense.
K
I
think
the
better
thing
to
do
is
to
try
and
uplift
the
remote
experience
to
make
it
better,
rather
than
limit
the
in-person
experience
to
make
that
worse.
So
I
think
that
needs
a
different
solution
to
a
fully
remote
meeting.
One
of
the
things
I've
commented
on
in
the
chat
is
probably
worth
saying
is
and
I've
no
idea
how
this
is
going
to
work,
but
I
note
that
igf
next
month
has
adopted
a
hybrid
model,
as
I
said
no
connection
with
that.
K
No
idea
what's
planned,
but
I
think
that's
bound
to
throw
up
some
interesting
observations,
good
or
bad.
So
there
must
be
some
learnings
from
that
that
will
help
guide
atf
113
in
in
different
ways.
So
it's
pretty
quite
fortuitous
timing,
it's
happening
when
it
is,
and
then
the
other
thing
just
finally,
just
by
chance.
I
noted
this
morning
in
the
news
there
was
an
article
about
one
of
the
big
hotel
chains
has
done
a
deal
with
zoo
to
facilitate
hybrid
meetings.
K
So
maybe,
if
we
go
to
multiple
in-person
remote
gatherings,
if,
if
you
will,
you
know-
maybe
that's
saying-
which
is
gonna
be
more
commonplace
in
future
anyway,
with
at
least
the
meaning
that
conference
facilities
and
so
will
be
equipped
with
the
right
sort
of
stuff
to
make
that
practical,
I'm
not
advocating
for
zoom
necessarily,
but
they
got
the
right
kit
there.
Presumably
it
will
work
without
the
other
tooling,
as
well.
G
So
andrew,
I
think
what
we
really
need
at
this
point
is
having
something
written
down.
If
you
have
a
concrete
proposal
of
what
we
should
do
in
a
hybrid
meeting,
then
just
write
it
down
in
the
draft,
and
so
we
can
have
some
discussion
based
on
some
text
would
be
really
helpful
because
we
in
in
the
ieh
are
also
in
this
in
this
meeting,
have
heard
many
different
opinions
about
different
things
right
and
it's
really
hard
to
to
come
to
a
conclusion
to
understand
what
the
community
wants.
Yeah
right
now,.
K
Now,
I'm
all
things
being
equal,
I
hope
to
be
in
poland
igf
next
month,
so
I'll
be
able
to
sort
of
put
some
reflections
from
what
the
in-person
experience
in
the
hybrid
meeting
was.
Hopefully
there
are
other
people
in
this
group
that
will
be
attending
remotely,
so
you
can
get
two
halves
but,
dare
I
say,
murder
to
to
to
put
forward
the
paper.
Doesn't
that
need
the
charter
to
change?
First,
because
that's
out
of
scope,
I
think
yeah.
G
But
I
think
we
have
the
charter
text
now.
So
as
soon
as
that
is
approved
like
you
can
start
writing
the
draft
now,
because
it
should
be
approved,
be
a
proof
person
and
maybe
one
more
point,
because
you
made
this
point
about-
there
should
be
additional
benefits
for
the
in-person
people,
and
then
there
were
comments
at
the
chat
that,
like
we
shouldn't
like
decrease
the
remote
performance
or
whatever.
G
So
this
is
kind
of
a
very
high
level
principle
where
we
need
to
find
agreement
right
so
far
when,
before
the
crisis
we
we
said
like
we
always
want
to
optimize
for
in
person,
because
that's
what
you
pay
for
and
that's
what
is
important
now
we
improved
remote
a
lot.
We
also
tried
to
improve
remote
before,
but
not
on
the
cost
of
in-person
meetings.
Now
we
improved
remote
a
lot.
G
Are
we
willing
to
take
some
of
this
back
if
it
would
make
a
person
bad
or
is
there
enough
benefit
already
by
just
going
there
and
socializing
that
you
might
also,
you
know,
take
some
drawbacks
from
for
the
for
the
in-person
people.
So
this
is
like
a
high-level
principle
where
I
don't
think
we
have
community
agreement
and
some
discussion
and
some
proposal
would
be
useful.
K
Might
be
really
helpful
because
I
think
they
are,
for
example,
going
to
have
a
single
mic
queue
so
that
you
know
you
have
to
use
your
device
if
you're
in
person
to
join
the
mic
queue.
So
there
might
be
some
simple
adaptations
and
I
don't
yeah.
Personally,
I
don't
see
how
that
detracts
from
the
in-person
experience,
but
then
at
least
makes
everyone
on
equal
footing
to
to
have
a
voice
in
the
room.
I
would
imagine
so.
G
I
mean
there
have
also
been
more
extreme
proposals
where
people
said
instead
of
having
the
whole
room
set
up
with
a
screen
and
the
press,
and
so
on.
Everybody
should
just
sit
with
their
laptop
in
a
room
and
participate
in
this
way
in
the
meeting
right.
So
this
is
the
other
extreme
like
we
need
to
figure
out
where
we
want
to
be.
G
B
Hello,
can
you
guys
hear
me?
Yes,
yeah
hi
abdrov
michael
shamed
me
to
come
to
the
mic
when
I
was
talking
about
the
hubs
in
india
so
just
wanted
to
share
a
quick
experience
there.
When
we
did
it,
it
was
not
that
successful.
I
think
the
main
reason
was
the
people
who
were
active
in
itf
in
india
were
actually
in
the
itf
meeting,
so
it
was
kind
of
very
difficult
to
sort
of
organize
like
in
a
hub
meeting
at
that
time.
B
Now,
if,
when
we
go
back
to
the
hybrid
model-
and
there
are
people
like
you
know,
there
is
a
restriction
in
india
where
we
are
not
able
to
travel
because
of
some
reason,
then
I
think
going
back
to
the
hub
model
would
be
a
little
bit
more
successful
and
we
could
try
that
the
issue
that
we
have
faced
at
that
time
was
that
people
had
so
varied
interest.
Even
in
like
you
know
this,
like
people,
some
people
are
interested
in
routing
some
in
apps.
B
So
how
do
we
organize
hubs
like
we
needed
six,
seven
rooms,
and
that
was
a
logistical
nightmare
at
that
time?
To
do
it
at
a
very
local,
like
in
a
simple
level,
so
we
kind
of
dropped
the
idea
what
we
started
doing
is
more
meetups,
something
that
we
call
rfcs.
We
love
we
kind
of
invited
people
that,
if
you
have
some
ideas,
come
and
talk
about
what
you
are
doing
in
itf,
even
if
something
that
you
have
implemented.
So
we
got
some
implementers.
Whoever.
B
Talking
now
about
the
hybrid
model
and
even
what
we
were
talking
about
with
with
gather
in
my
area,
what
I've
seen
is
like
you
know,
I
think
we
need
some
kind
of
forcing
function
like
organize
some
event,
something
to
make
people
come
there,
because
I
know
so
many
people
I
talk
to
like
meet
me
and
gathers
like.
Oh,
I
don't
have
time
for
that
there's.
So
I
have
a
busy
week.
B
I
want
to
go.
Do
things
so,
even
if
it's
some
technical,
like
hot
rfc,
was
a
pretty
good
thing
that
we
did
in
gather
something
like
that.
Even
if
working
group
chairs
can
organize
something.
Okay,
we'll
be
reviewing
this
draft,
which
is
next
in
isg.
So
if
anybody
has
any
concerns,
let's
go
and
meet
and
force
people
to
use
that
I
think
it
I
I
see
some
potential
there.
It
would
be
good
to
like
you
know,
we
find
some
ways
to
make
that
work.
Thank
you.
G
So
about
the
hub
experience,
I
think
it
would
be
super
because
I
have
like
no
experience
with
that
and
like
in
I'm,
assuming
that
you
now
talk
about
the
hub
where
there
was
actually
a
meeting
during
the
meeting
right
other
talked
about,
perhaps
where
there
were
pre
or
site
meetings
or
whatever.
So
writing
down
your
experience
for
others
to
learn
from
it
would
be
very
useful.
I
think
thanks.
E
When
I,
I
think
one
of
the
challenges
for
me
on
like
one
of
these
hub
things
is,
as
I
think
other
people
said,
like
ultimately
you're
there,
but
then
everyone
goes
off
in
eight
different
rooms
or
just
gets
on
their
laptop,
which
is
not
awesome.
You
may
be
separating
out
the
plenary
as
we
do
this
time
is
an
opportunity
to
gather
everyone
for
a
single
event.
So
all
the
bay
area
people
could
get
together
and
watch
the
plenary
and
then
have
some
position,
something
like
that
might
work.
I
don't
know
just
thought.
D
G
D
G
No,
so
do
the
chairs
want
to
consider
an
adoption
call
or
what's
the
next
step
for
us.
A
D
N
You
it's
taking
a
while
to
but
yeah.
I
see
the
option
now.
N
Okay,
I
can
see
him
here.
You
see
him
great
all
right,
so
this
is
about
the
draft
on
running
an
ietf
hackathon,
just
to
give
you
an
update
on
where
we're
at
with
it.
N
So
just
maybe
for
those
of
you
who
this
draft
might
be
a
little
bit
new,
just
a
quick
recap.
What
the
draft
is
about
it's
about
running
an
ihf
hackathon
and
those
are
two
to
encourage
the
itf
community
to
come
together
to
collaborate
on
code
and
code,
that's
related
to
the
work
we're
doing
in
the
ietf
around.
You
know
the
drafts
that
we're
working
on
and
this
this
document
is
to
provide
some
practices
around
how
to
run
those
those
ietf
hackathons
it.
N
You
know
the
hackathon
started
out,
as
I
mean
as
the
itf
meetings,
this
in-person
events,
but
we've
always
had
remote
participation
very
similar
to
itf
meetings
in
general
and
then
because
of
the
pandemic,
we
had
to
adapt
to
running
hackathons
online.
Only
so
this
draft
covers
both
as
opposed
to
what
you
just
saw
with
the
previous
draft,
which
just
really
focusing
on
online.
N
N
So
we
started
working
group
last
call
after
iatf
after
the
last
ietf
meeting,
and
thanks
to
those
who
reviewed-
and
you
know
there
was
a
lot
of
good
feedback-
mostly
positive.
Actually
I
think
all
positive
over
pointing
out
some
some
issues
that
could
be
raised
and
so
what
I
did
for
tracking
these
was.
I
entered
them
all
as
issues
in
github
and
then
started
working
through
them
there
and
basically,
oh
sorry,
let
me
go
back.
All
those
were
resolved
and
and
then
a
new
version
of
the
draft
was
produced.
N
Unfortunately,
I
couldn't
get
that
done
in
time
for
the
the
deadline
for
submitting
drafts
for
this
ietf
meeting,
but
I
I
just
posted
it
a
few
days
ago.
Hopefully
you
saw
that
on
the
list,
even
if
you
haven't
had
a
chance
to
review
it
yet
yeah
I'd
appreciate
it.
If
you
would
take
a
look,
I
know
I
worked
with
all
the
submitters
of
the
issues
to
make
sure
that
this
draft
resolved
their
concerns.
N
So
the
first
thing
was
around
something
new:
that's
been
developed
really
as
a
result
of
the
pandemic
and
that's
what
we
refer
to
as
hacknet,
and
this
is
for
remote
networking
so
that
when
you're
online
here,
you
can
still
connect
to
an
ietf
network
or
a
virtual
ietf
network,
and
that's
really
important
for
the
hackathon
or
at
least
some
hackathon
projects
that
that
really
need
that
idea
of
like
connecting
everyone
in
the
group
connecting
their
devices.
N
You
know
together
on
a
common
layer,
2
network,
so
hack.net
provides
that
and
that's
been
a
great
thing.
We
certainly
plan
to
continue
to
use
that,
even
as
we
return
back
to
in-person
meetings
as
a
way
to
enable
people
who
are
remote
to
join
the
ietf
network-
and
so
I've
documented
that
before,
but
the
concern
was
that
you
know
this
is
still
very
experimental
and
although
it's
worked
great,
I
think
we've
enjoyed
using
it
for
the
hackathon,
the
noc
folks,
who
are
supporting
it
mentioned.
Like
hey.
N
You
know
we
want
everyone
to
know
that
this
is
still
an
experimental
thing,
so
text
for
that
effect
has
been
added
into
the
end
of
the
draft.
Just
to
set
expectations
around
it.
N
Okay,
I'll
move
to
the
next
thing,
nesting
was
around
also
with
hack.net.
I
think
dhruv
pointed
out.
Well,
you
know
yeah,
that's
great,
but
what
about
additional
security
considerations
that
may
come
into
play
as
a
result
of
that
we
had
some
considerations
around
privacy,
but
nothing
around
security,
and-
and
so
that
was
a
really
good
point,
and
I'm
glad
to
phrase
that
so
you
can
see
what
we've
added
here-
that,
yes,
it
is
kind
of
opening
up
a
new
vector
for
for
potential.
G
N
And
misuse
of
the
ietf
network
being
able
to
join
remotely.
However,
we
do
have
some
mechanisms
in
place.
You,
your
access,
is
tied
to
your
data
tracker
account.
So
at
least
we
we
know
who
is
accessing
and
then
you
know,
as
at
any
ietf
meeting,
we
always
try
to
keep
the
ietf
network
as
open
as
possible,
and
that
probably
makes
it
a
little
bit
more
subject
to
potential
attacks,
but
we
also
just
rely
on
ietf.
N
You
know
the
community,
that's
at
a
meeting
to
to
respect
the
ietf
network
and
that's
actually
worked
out
pretty
well
for
us,
but
in
the
event
anything
did
go
wrong.
We
would
treat
sort
of
misuse
of
the
ietf
network
through
hacknet
the
same
as
we
would
if
a
person
at
an
in-person
meeting
was
misusing
the
ietf
network
and
address
it.
That
way.
N
And
then
the
last
thing
drew
also
pointed
out
that
you
know
there's
a
ton
of
basically
links
to.
You
know
references
whether
it
be
wiki
pages
or
web
pages
things
on
the
internet
within
the
draft,
and
I
had
just
included
these
all
as
inline
sort
of
things
using
you
know
with
using
markdown,
and
so
the
thought
was
well
hey.
These
should
probably
be
informative
references,
so
I
added
an
informative
reference
section
and
you
can
see
the
way
I've
gone
about
doing
this.
N
I
just
basically
the
the
text
that
I
had
in
the
draft
I
made
as
the
title
and
then
the
the
target
is
is
the
url
where
the
things
appear.
I
don't
know
if
I
actually
did
this
correctly,
and
if
people
on
in
this
meeting
now
take
a
look
and
have
a
some
thoughts
about.
Maybe
is
this
appropriate
use
of
informational
references?
Is
there
a
better
way
to
go
about
this?
Perhaps
I
should
have
done
something
different
with
the
title.
N
I'd
be
happy
to
hear
that
I'm
also
planning
on.
If
I
don't
get
any
other
feedback
I'll
take
it
to
the
maybe
the
tools
discuss
list
just
to
let
them
know
hey.
This
is
what
I've
done.
Did
I
mess
up
and
you
have
a
better
idea
so
thoughts
on
that
would
be
appreciated.
N
And
the
next
step,
you
know,
there's
just
that
one
thing
with
the
the
references
that
I
think
needs
to
probably
could
use
some
improving
other
than
that,
though,
I
think
it's
ready
to
progress
the
draft.
A
Charles
and
the
goal
is
to
ship
as
possible.
N
I
think
you
said
suresh.
The
goal
is
to
progress
this
draft
as
soon
as
possible.
Kind
of
get
it
done.
N
That
would
be
my
goal.
I
wasn't
sure
I
heard
you
right
kind
of
the
audio
cut
out
for
me.
N
N
If
no
one's
coming
to
the
queue
or
has
questions,
I
guess
I'm
done.
That
was
my
last
slide.
D
Yeah
we
heard
we
heard
you
okay
suresh,
but
it
was
just
a
little
soft
but
yeah.
Just
reiterate:
there
is
rechartered
text.
It's
going
to
go
to
the
mailing
list.
N
Yeah,
so
regarding
the
rechartering
text,
I
I
had
a
look
at
it
and
it
seemed
like,
like
several
people
did
review
it
there
within
the
google
daca.
But
in
terms
of
the
the
next
step
to
I
mean,
do
we
think
it's
ready
that
this
group
needs
to
review
it
more
or
is
it
like?
You
know,
ready
to
take
it
as
a
proposed
recharter
to
the
isg,
or
I
wasn't
quite
clear
on
if
you're
looking
for
more
feedback
and
how.
D
I'm
just
gonna
mute.
You
yeah
that
I
think
this
was
a
suresh
and
I
took
all
the
changes
people
had
put
in
before
we
created
a
new
draft
version,
but
it's
worth
folks
commenting
on
the
list
before
it
goes
for
a
final
recharter,
but
so
yeah
look
out
for
it
on
the
list,
but
I
think
it's
actually
in
really
good
shape.
There's
no
outstanding
questions
that
I
can
think
to
present
to
you
right
now
about
it.
So
yeah
suresh
is
going
to
email.
The
list.
N
Okay,
I
I
was
happy
with
with
the
text
that
was
was
in
there.
I
mean
the
one
thing
I
thought
about
was
I
didn't
know
if
we
wanted
to
call
out
specific
sort
of
deliverables
or
drafts
that
we
think
it
does
provide
like
the
types
of
drafts,
the
types
of
things
that
need
to
be
covered,
but
maybe
if
that
was
the
only
thing
I
thought
of,
is
if
we
wanted
to
add
a
little
more
specificity
around
that
I.
D
G
A
Done
it
exactly
for
that
media
and
I'll
ship
it
up
to
the
list
right,
like
it's
kind
of
hard
to
go
through
so
there's
three
classes
of
changes
in
there,
so
one
of
them
is
to
remove
the
cove
related
stuff
and
make
it
a
bit
more
general,
and
the
second
thing
is
adding
hybrid
media
principles
and
third
thing
is
really
changing.
The
meeting
feed
not
into
a
bcp.
G
I'm
looking
at
the
text
now
I
was
I'm
actually
wondering
if
what
ted
proposed
earlier
as
a
more
a
high
level
recommendation,
which
is
somehow
related
to
tooling,
but
probably
not
just
like
how
to
incentivize
more
socializing,
for
example,
if
that
would
still
be
in
scope
or
not,
because
we
have
this
one
point
about
planning
fully
online
meetings.
But
that
point
is
mostly
focusing
on
scheduling
aspects.
G
D
I
think
it's
okay
to
be
ambiguous.
If
it's
not
obviously
out
of
scope,
then
I
don't
feel
like
we
need
to
make
a
change
and
if
it
it's
something
that
we
we
feel
is
important,
and
I
think
if
somebody
wanted
to
write
that
down,
I
know
ted
was
saying
supposedly
doesn't
have
the
time
to
do
it.
But
if
someone
feels
strongly
enough
about
writing
something
about
social
interaction,
then
if
it
isn't
explicitly
out
of
scope
with
this
charter,
I
think
that's
a
good
thing.
It
means
that
there
can
be
some
experimentation
and
suggestions
around
that.
D
G
We
just
to
add
to
that
I
think
for
me,
it
probably
would
also
be
hard
to
put
something
in
without
actually
seeing
it
and
understanding
what
the
draft
would
be
seeing.
D
Okay,
I'm
just
rounding
out
notes.
I
encourage
everybody
who's
who's
spoken
today.
I
didn't
capture
a
lot
of
the
discussion
in
the
chat
and
the
notes,
but
I
think
for
the
most
part,
it's
they're
thorough.
So,
but
you
can
go
ahead
and
check
them.
Make
changes
before
we
finalize.
L
Yeah
just
to
bring
something
that
I
was
mentioning
in
the
chat
there
was
this
draft
from
elliott
lear,
who
I
think
isn't
here.
We
got
to
stop
meeting
like
this,
suggesting
that
we
should
or
the
llc
or
someone
should
investigate
changing
the
in-person
meeting
cadence
because
of
the
costs
of
very
regular
in-person
meetings
and
I'm
just
looking
at
the
charter.
L
I
I
guess
I
hope
we
could
like
emphasize
that
or
change
that
more
substantially,
but
it
just
seems
in
scope
to
me.
So
what
I'm
saying.
C
Right,
yeah
yeah,
it
isn't,
it
isn't
scope,
I
think,
and
so
the
isg
and
the
iab
and
the
llc.
We
discussed
this
a
little
bit
on
a
workshop.
We
had
a
virtual
workshop.
C
We
had
a
few
a
few
weeks
ago
and
so
generally
the
feeling
was
that
because
of
covet
and
this
long
string
of
fully
online
meetings,
it's
not
actually
clear
if
this
is
sort
of
something
we
want
to
do
right
away
in
the
sense
that
we
are
just
trying
to
build
back
to
go
into
some
in-person
capability
and
immediately
thinking
about
you
know,
should
we
change
the
cadence
and
the
type
of
meetings
we
have
now
after
kovitz
seemed
like
something
that
was
very
difficult
to
imagine
the
other
thing
where
we
are
sort
of
a
little
all
over
the
place.
C
Is
you
know
what
what
do
we
think?
What
would
that
look
like?
So?
Would
we
replace
one
of
the
three
meetings,
or
at
least
one
of
the
three
meetings
with
the
fully
online
meeting?
Would
we
add
fully
online
meetings
to
the
year,
and,
and
so
if
there
were,
you
know
people
that
felt
that
adding
meetings
would
just
make
the
year
too
busy
with
too
much
itf
stuff
going
on,
especially
since
there's
also
interim
meetings
replacing
one
of
the
three
with
a
fully
online
meeting.
C
The
feeling
was
that
you
know
which
one
and
why
and
they're,
already
sort
of
rare
enough
that
you
know
spacing
them
out
further
would
be
maybe
difficult
to
do.
But
so
so
we
were
sort
of
basically
decided
to
punt
this
forward
and
and
worry
about
this
as
we
sort
of
ramp
back
up
from
corbett.
But
all
that
said
right.
C
If,
if
the
community
wants
to
discuss
this,
it's
certainly
in
scope,
and
I
think
if
there
would
be
some
sort
of
consensus
or
at
least
an
indication
of
consensus
expressed,
I
think
that
might
be
helpful.
But
in
like
in
the
isg
and
ibn
llc.
We
didn't
have
that
when
we
discussed
this.
L
That's
useful
context
thanks.
I
I
think
it's
an
ideal
time
to
consider
it.
I
think
we
have
an
opportunity
now
that
remote
people
aren't
second
class
citizens,
because
we've
all
had
to
be
like
this
is
an
opportunity
to
not
go
back
to
okay.
Well,
let's
make
them
second
class
citizens
again
for
a
few
years,
and
then
we
can
talk
about
switching
I'd.
Rather,
we
just
not
go
back
to
second
class
citizenship.
K
Yeah,
just
a
quick
comment,
one
observation
from
the
last
couple
of
years-
I
I
think,
has
underlined
why,
for
for
those
people
that
are
lucky
enough
to
be
to
be
able
to
participate
in
person,
why
that's
important
and
and
does
make
a
big
difference
notwithstanding
improving
the
remote
experience?
K
There's
a
lot
of
learnings
from
the
last
two
years
which
mean
that
going
forward
the
the
remote
experience
could
and
should
be
a
lot
better
than
perhaps
it
it
was
previously
and
then
as
a
quicker
side,
without
going
too
far
off
into
other
matters.
For
those
people
more
concerned
about
the
carbon
footprint
of
in
person.
K
A
Thanks
if
again,
like
you
know
just
like
cut
in
for
a
second
and
sorry,
john,
like
the
idea
is
not
to
go
through
it
just
to
kind
of
show
you
like
it's
a
extensive
change
in
the
chatter,
I
did
send
the
link
to
the
it's
in
the
chat.
So
if
you
can
go
in
and
click
on
it
like,
you
know,
just
go
ahead
and
look
at
it
at
your
leisure
like
this
is
not
to
finalize
it
today.
So
sorry
about
that,
I
just
wanted
like.
A
I
think
somebody
proposed
to
bring
it
up
and
take
a
look.
I
think
it
was
media,
so
I
just
like
brought
it
up
right
like
but
yeah.
A
Absolutely
the
idea
is
not
to
litigate
this
now,
because
it's
it
doesn't
make
sense
to
do
it
online
on
this,
so
we
had
like,
probably
like
a
month
of
open
period
like
where
people
could
go
and
comment
and
like
a
lot
of
people
did
so
we
can
probably
have
some
small
cool
off
period
before
we
ship
it
off
to
lars,
I
would
say:
would
a
week
be
good
enough
for
you
lars
to
like
set
off
as
a
cooling
period,
so
people
can
fight
their
idea
fatigue
and
then,
like
you,
know,
work
on
it
next
week.
C
O
Formal
thing
yep
sounds
good,
so
thank
you
very
much
jay.
Please
go
ahead
thanks.
P
Thanks
so
on
this
question
of
regularly
meeting
offline,
sorry
online,
not
in
person
a
few
things,
so
what
data
we
have
shows
that
people
strongly
prefer
meeting
in
person
and
are
experiencing
adverse
effects
from
not
meeting
in
person.
P
Secondly,
it's
it's
not
actually
more
expensive
for
us
to
run
an
on-site
one
compared
to
an
in-person
one,
because
they're
both
relatively
cost
neutral.
Obviously
it's
more
expensive
for
attendees
and
for
sponsors.
The
sponsors
are
quite
comfortable
with
that
and
I
suspect
the
attendees
by
large
are
next
thing.
P
Is
we've
started
doing
carbon
calculations
for
on-site
meetings
in
person
meetings
the
last
time
we
had
one,
and
we
have
a
process
set
up
to
do
that
again
when
we
go
back
to
that
and
we've
started
looking
at
carbon
credits
or
carbon
offsetting
anyway,
the
we
haven't
done
anything
about
that,
because
we
haven't
been
expecting
to
meet
in
person
for
quite
some
time.
P
But
it
looks
as
though
that's
perfectly
possible
for
us
to
do
within
the
cost
of
a
meeting
to
do
carbon
or
setting
now,
obviously,
that's
not
as
good
as
not
traveling
in
the
first
place,
but
it's
something
a
bit
better
and
then
finally,
the
bit
about
being
second
class.
So
a
lot
of
work
is
going
in
to
try
to
prevent
the
remote
experience
being
second
class
compared
to
the
in-person
on-site
experience.
P
So
that's
through
the
technology,
so
we
have
a
new
version
of
meet
echo
coming,
which
well
would
anyway,
there
are
various
things
going
on
there
that
we're
aiming
to
do
to
try
to
adjust
that
such
as
a
single
queue,
for
example,
and
those
things
it.
Obviously,
a
lot
of
that
comes
down
to
the
behavior
of
people
within
the
who
are
on
site
as
to
how
they
are
willing
to
accommodate
people
who
are
off
site.
P
So
we
can
only
sell
some
of
it
with
technology,
but
I'm
detaining
to
do
that
and
of
course
the
other
problem
is
time
zones
that
we
have
to
decide
when
we
go
back
to
these.
If
we're
still
going
to
have
a
six
hour
meeting
or
if
we
go
back
to
an
eight
or
nine
hour
meeting,
because
that
would
be
much
more
difficult
for
participants,
so
you
know
there
are,
as
I
said.
P
Q
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
say
that,
yes,
I
do
want
to
meet
in
person.
I
don't
necessarily
want
to
meet
in
person
more
than
once
a
year,
and
you
know
well,
my
my
kids
are
will
be
in
college
very
soon
one's
not
already
there.
When
my
kids
were
younger,
doing
three
meetings
a
year
was
well.
I
never
did
it
actually.
I
never
did
more
than
two
meetings
a
year.
Q
The
other
thing
that
I
think
I
we
assume
that
the
itf
meeting
structure
really
works
at
all.
I
think
it
obviously
doesn't
because
to
participate
meaningfully
in
any
working
group
meeting.
You
have
to
read
the
drafts
over
an
itf
meeting
week.
I
usually
do
at
least
12
working
groups.
Q
I
don't
think
that
most
people
can
do
that,
and
I
don't
think
that
the
itf
meeting
structure
really
relates
to
how
I
would
want
to
do
work
as
an
engineer
if
I
designed
the
process
from
scratch.
Finally,
on
the
carbon
offsets
thing,
the
reason
that
you
make
a
symbolic
gesture
on
carbon
emissions
is
to
remind
yourself
that
it's
important.
So
it's
not.
Q
I
mean
we've
never
talked
about
the
carbon
cost
of
our
protocols
before
the
reason
for
starting
to
to
making
a
symbolic
gesture
in
terms
of
how
we
do
our
own
work
is
to
remind
ourselves
that
that
is
important.
Q
Q
A
Thanks
phil,
I
I
think,
like
one
of
the
things
that
you
brought
up
right,
it's
kind
of
a
bit
relevant
here
and
I
don't
know
if
you
that's
what
you
meant
phil
but,
like
you
know,
you
said
this
is
not
how
you
want
to
work.
I
think
some
people
have
suggested
like
a
whole.
R
Yeah
I
mentioned
this
in
the
chat,
but
you
know
certainly
looking
at
the
in-person
meeting
cost
of
the
carbon,
I
mean.
How
do
you
factor
in
the
benefit
that
the
work
we
do
at
the
ietf
right?
I
mean
we
empower
a
lot
of
remote
work
right,
there's
a
huge,
I
think,
multiplicative
benefit
from
what
we
do.
So,
even
though
we
might
burn
some
carbon
getting
in
person
if
we
work
really
effectively
the
benefit
and
the
reduction
of
carbon
across
the
globe.
R
You
know
from
remote
work
and-
and
things
like
that,
I
think
it's
probably
multiplicative
right,
and
so
I
I
don't
think
we
should
get
into
counting
numbers
too
much
in
that
particular
sense
and
into
what
phil
said.
He
did
say
I
a
few
times,
but
there
were
a
few
like
things
he
said
that
were
like
sort
of
statements
about
ietf
I
mean
I
find
it
very
effective
three
times
a
year
right
so
I
mean
I
guess
you
have
to
balance
that
right,
some
people,
it
works
some
people,
it
doesn't.
S
Hi,
everybody
well
hey,
hey
suresh,
and
I
can
see
that
christian's
doing
his
part
because
he
you
know
in
terms
of
saving
carbon
because
he
clearly
doesn't
have
the
heat
on
in
his
house.
He's
got
that
jacket
on.
Well,
it's
been
quite
a
while,
since
I
published
draft
we
are,
we
got
to
start
meeting
like
we
got
to
stop
meeting
like
this.
S
If
ever
there
was
a
draft
that
was
overtaken
by
events,
that
was
the
one
just
a
couple
of
brief
comments
and
I'll
move
on.
First
of
all,
thank
you
jay.
Thank
you
very
much
jay
for
collecting
the
information.
S
The
draft
that
I
wrote
was
not
intended
to
be
prescriptive
in
terms
of
any
any
particular
solution,
but
rather
for
us
to
ponder
our
footprint
our
footprint
on
the
planet
and
to
maybe
consider
getting
us
out
of
the
mode
of
where
we
book
five
to
seven
years
in
advance,
where
it's
almost
impossible
to
run
an
experiment
in
terms
of
how
we
might
restructure
things
but
to
think
it's,
but
to
get
us
into
better
position
where
we
could
try
different
modes
of
communication
and
collaboration.
S
So
now
that
I'm
not
even
sure
we
can
say
we
we
we're
seeing
the
end,
you
know
the
light
at
the
end
of
the
tunnel.
Yet
here
in
europe
the
numbers
are
spiking
again,
but
assuming
that
day
comes
my
suggestion,
is
we
go
back
to
this
notion
of
trying
a
few
different
things
and
seeing
what
works?
S
S
So
it
could
be
that
the
costs
are
it's
very
hard
to
account
for
all
of
these
costs,
but
the
cost
that
I
primarily
wanted
to
account
for
was
the
one
that
my
kid
was
sort
of.
You
know
buttoning
me
with
and
saying
hey
you're
becoming
the
problem
in
terms
of
carbon
footprint,
so
that
is
one
of
the
issues
that
I
think
is
important
and
to
the
point
that
oh
yeah
well,
there's,
obviously
a
benefit
of
us
getting
together
and
meeting
and
being
productive.
S
I'd
be
a
little
nervous
about
using
that
that
that
line,
because
I
think
everybody
would
end
up
using
it
saying.
Oh,
we're
always
benefiting
the
world
by
meeting
and
we're
social
people,
so
we
like
to
meet
so
the
trick
is
to
find
the
right
balance
anyway,
thanks
for
your
patience
and
wish
everybody
a
great
day.
C
Chime
in
there
hey
yeah,
I
I
sort
of
want
to
that
was
all
great
elliot,
but
I
sort
of
wonder
if
you
wanted
to,
if
you
had
a
concrete
change
in
mind
that
that
we
sort
of
you
think
sort
of
we
should
do
or
that
you
think
we
should.
We
could
get
consensus
on,
because
that's
sort
of
where
you
know
this.
This
is
sort
of
the
step
that
I
struggle
with
right.
S
Okay.
Well
thanks
for
the
question
lars
very
classically,
you
know
the
question
I'm
used
to
you
asking
that
question
at
this
point,
so
I
actually
have
a
couple
of
concrete
suggestions.
S
I'm
going
to
go
from
a
little
bit
abstract,
then
into
the
concrete
at
the
abstract
level.
I
think
we
should
collect
a
number
of
possible
approaches
that
we
could
try.
S
When
I
say
try
I
mean
not
standardize
on
in
terms
of
this
is
the
way
things
will
go
in
the
future,
but
I
do
mean
try.
We
don't
have
to
try
them
every
year,
but
maybe
we
plan
out
a
schedule
of
how
we
try
things.
So
what
does
that
mean?
Concretely
I'll?
Give
you
a
couple
of
examples
that
we
could
try.
S
The
one
that
I
like
is
going
to
semi-annual
meetings
to
try
for
a
for
plenary
purposes
and
then
load
up
with
lots
of
interims
and
further
in
that
period
of
time,
require
that
the
interims
not
be
in
person
in
doing
that,
the
other.
There
are
a
couple
of
variants
on
that.
S
That
would
be
one
example
of
trying.
Another
thing
to
try
would
be
to
do
semi-annual
meetings
again
and
actually,
after
your
clarification.
C
S
Yeah
yeah
exactly
okay,
thank
you,
yeah.
Another
approach
is
to
do
a
similar
semi-annual
activity,
but
require
blocks.
If
you
will
of
of
of
interim
meetings
that
occur
in
person
on
the
book
ends
on.
So
if
we're
meeting
and
say
I'll
just
pick,
two
dates,
if
we're
meeting
in
say
march
and
november
then
require
interim
blocks
in
say,
july
and
december,
or
something
like
that,
maybe
even
it
out
a
little
bit
so
that
it's
a
little
bit
more
on
the
q
on
you
know
symmetrical.
S
So
that
would
be
another
approach
to
try
and
I
don't
have
a
particularly
strong.
You
know
direction
to
say:
let's
do
this
first,
so
let's
do
that
first,
but
what
I
would
like
to
do
before
we
do.
Any
of
them
is
at
least
do
a
calculation,
a
rough
sketch
calculation
as
to
which
we
think
will
have
the
most
beneficial
impact
in
terms
of
the
environment.
So
we
have
some
understanding,
because
last
thing,
I'd
like
to
do
is
try
something
that
makes
things
worse
for
the
environment
and
we
could
absolutely
do
that.
S
You
know
I
don't
put
it
beyond
us
to
to
do
that
by
accident.
So
that's
what
that's
one
approach,
the
you
know,
a
third
try
by
the
way
would
be
to
go
annual
meetings
and
make
them
every
you
know
make
make
them
for
two
weeks
in
light,
but
do
a
lot
more
interims.
I
think
that
may
be
too
radical
for
the
community.
S
To
be
honest,
I
think
it's
already
pretty
radical
to
swallow
the
idea
of
going
semi-annual,
so
those
are
just
a
couple
of
ideas,
but
again
I
didn't
mean
to
be
at
all
prescriptive
right.
These
are
just
some
things
we
we
could
evaluate
and
the
intent
that
I
had
of
asking
jay
to
get
the
data
and
ask
the
llc
to
get
the
data
was
to
help
us
calculate
these
things
in
terms
of
what
would
be
beneficial
and
then
present
that
back
to
the
community
as
options
of
things
to
try.
S
What
I
think
is
most
important
in
the
process,
though,
is
to
make
sure
from
a
contractual
standpoint.
The
llc
sees
that
we're
interested
in
doing
these
tries
and
thus
allows
for,
at
a
contractual
level
us
to
be
able
to
to
manage
the
hotels
and
things
like
that,
and
I
I
don't
want
to
discount
the
effort.
That's
involved
in
that
I'm
sure
that's
a
substantial
challenge,
all
right.
Thanks
again.
F
Thank
you.
We
can
have
all
sorts
of
opinions
about
what
is
best
for
the
environment
and
the
planet
and
so
on.
But
a
real
fact
of
life
for
me
is
that
my
employer,
cisco,
has
announced
that
they
will
be
cutting
travel
expenses
by
60
going
out
of
kovit,
and
I
heard
ericsson
say
similar
things
from
the
ceo.
F
So
it
would
be
really
nice
if
we
could
have
no
second
level
citizenship
in
the
meetings.
If
we
are
remote,
I
don't
think
we
need
to
change
all
that
much.
You
can
have
as
many
meetings
as
you
want
and
so
on,
but
make
sure
that
everybody
who
wants
to
pass
his
bait
remotely
can
do
so
in
a
good
way.
I
don't
want
to
be
second
rate.
O
N
Okay,
yeah,
you.
N
N
But
you
know,
I
think
we
need
to
keep
in
mind
that
there's
that
that
spectrum
we
heard
from
php
how,
even
just
within
his
time,
working
within
the
ietf,
how
he
participates
as
his
change
and
his
level
of
participation
has
changed,
and
so
to
me
that
the
real
thing
for
us
to
focus
on
would
be
the
hybrid
approach
and
looking
to
see.
N
You
know,
let's
keep
the
remote
participation
and
let's
continue
to
make
improvements
in
how,
when
you
do
attend
the
meeting
remotely
that
that
experience
is
good,
and
you
know,
I
think
what
you'll
find
quite
naturally,
as
a
result
of
that
is,
you
will
have
more
remote
attendees
that
people
will
you
always
make
that
trade
off?
Do
I
travel
to
the
meeting,
or
do
I
attend
remotely,
or
do
I
not
go
at
all
right?
We
all
make
that
decision,
or
we
have
for
a
number
of
years
before
covet
and
even
with
covet.
N
How
much
time
do
I
devote
to
it,
but
I
think
what
you'll
start
to
see
is
if
the
hybrid,
if
the
remote
experience
is
good,
people
will
tend
to
use
that
a
little
bit
more,
a
little
tip
to
where
okay,
I
can't
or
I
don't
want
to
travel
there's
only
these
few
things
I
can
do
them
remotely.
I
don't
need
to
be
there
we'll
enable
that
decision
or
we'll
make
people
more
likely
to
make
that
decision
and
we'll
improve
the
overall
experience
for
for
everyone.
N
If
we
do
it
carefully,
I
think
if
we,
what
we
need
to
watch
out
for
is
that
we
don't
mess
up
and
everyone
feels
like
they
need
to
be
at
the
in-person
meeting,
or
else
you
know,
because
remote's
useless
or
alternatively,
we
make
the
in-person
meeting
so
bad,
because
we
optimize
for
remote
experience
that
no
one
shows
up,
and
then
we
say
like
oh
we'll,
just
meet
online,
because
we
know
that's
not
ideal
either.
So
I'm
really
trying
to
find
that
sweet
spot
with
these
experiments.
N
People
have
been
mentioning,
I
think,
that's
great
I'd
like
to
see
us
go
forward
with
that
and
then
maybe
after
that,
give
that
a
little
bit
time.
Let
that
see
some
of
the
benefits
of
that
and
where
we
end
up
and
then
we
could
probably
also
meet
you
know
in
person
less
often
if
the
the
whole
hybrid
experience
or
remote,
you
know,
attendance
thing
is
continues
to
get
better
as
it
has.
K
All
right,
just
picking
up
on
the
sort
of
discussion
on
on
move
to
more
interims,
there's
an
observation.
I
think
if,
if,
if,
if
the
itf
was
to
become
much
more
interim
so
based
that
feels
to
me
very
divisive
for
the
community,
and
so
it
depends
whether
you
think
the
itf
is
a
community
or
not
so
for
some
people
that
may
not
be
a
consideration.
K
But
if
you
like,
by
putting
much
more
stuff
into
very
discreet
silos,
then
you
lose
the
perspectives
from
people
that
perhaps
aren't
focused
on
solving
a
particular
problem
but
can
bring
a
unique
perspective
to
it
because
they
happen
to
be
a
on-site
with
a
spare
slot
so
so
drop
in,
and
I
think
that's
less
likely
to
happen.
If
we've
got
you
know
a
huge
spread
of
interims.
K
I'd
also
worry
that
it
will
be
harmful
for
diversity
if,
if
there's
a
much
greater
use
of
of
interims
because
they
tend-
and
this
is
a
generalism-
but
I
think
if
you
look
at
the
data,
it
would
be
brutally
supportive
of
this
to
be
scheduled
for
the
convenience
of
you
know.
People
currently
involved
in
a
particular
working
group.
K
So
it
makes
it
potentially
a
lot
harder
unintentionally
for
people
in
other
places
to
participate
effectively
and
frequently
so,
dare
I
say
if,
if
one
thing
we
might
want
to
consider
is,
should
some
of
the
time
zone
guidelines
that
on
the
paper
that
we
started
this
meeting
with
apply
to
interims,
should
they
be
required
to
rotate
time
zones?
K
K
You
know,
maybe
that
would
be
a
good
use
of
of
some
time
and
some
expertise,
because
I
think
at
the
moment
my
impression
is
they're,
pretty
ad
hoc
yeah
in
how
they're
arranged
I
mean.
I
know
there
are
some
rules
around
you
have
give
to
two
weeks
notice,
et
cetera,
but
other
than
that
they're
left
a
lot
to
these
devices
of
the
individual
working
group,
so
perhaps
they'll
be
benefit
from
that
being
regularized,
but
I'd
go
back
to
my
original
point.
K
Nevertheless,
if
there's
to
be
an
itf
community
as
opposed
to
a
working
group
community,
then
you
know
there
would
be
implications
in
in
in
putting
a
lot
more
emphasis
on
those
rather
than
the
itf
sort
of
meetings
as
they're,
currently
structured
thanks.
E
Martin
thanks
three
three
points
that
are
in
response
to
the
things
that
have
been
moving
through
the
discourse
here.
I
would
like
to
unpack
the
second
class
experience.
Experiment.
E
Second
class
experience
comment
so
like
personally,
it
was
only
three
or
four
years
ago
I
was
a
regular,
remote
attendee
and,
having
done
having
done
a
a
having
been
a
remote
attendee
under
the
old
regime
and
a
personal
attendee,
and
now
this
this
new
kind
of
remote
attendee
thing,
I
would
say,
like
the
real
difference,
is
that
in
the
in
the
first
case
I
was
not
really
participating
in
the
side.
Conversations
for
reasons
that
are
obvious.
Like
the
side,
most
people
would
agree.
E
The
side
conversations
are
extremely
valuable
and
I
am
not
prepared
to
kind
of
kneecap
the
productivity
of
itf
by
in
an
effort
to
ensure
quality
by
just
degrading
the
value
by
eliminating
this
really
valuable
process,
because
some
people
can't
attend
it.
Secondly,
there's
been
a
talk
about
like
like
more
strict
corporate
travel
rules.
You
know,
obviously,
if
people
don't
want
to
come
to
meetings
anymore,
we're
going
to
stop
having
them,
but
to
the
extent
that
the
companies
are
limited,
limiting
travel
to
within
their
continent.
E
That
is
actually
a
case
to
continue
to
be
three
times
in
person
per
year,
because
then
at
least
you
could
get
the
productivity
of
in
person
once
per
year.
That's
what's
why
we
rotate
to
a
large
extent
and
then,
finally,
about
interims.
Look,
you
know
I
was
a
big
participant
in
quick.
The
interims
were
amazing,
but
ietf
107
was
at
least
a.
E
I
did
not
find
that
to
be
a
particularly
good
model
and
and
like
you
can
you
can
tweak
the
details
and
maybe
there's
some
like
one
magic
formula
for
for
in
terms
that
would
work
really
well,
but
that
that
seemed
to
be
really
onerous
on
people's
schedules
and
also
as
andrew
was
suggesting
not
very
inclusive
in
terms
of
time
zones
like
it
always
falls
into
that
link
optimized
time
zone.
So,
like
I
said,
I
midterms
are
good
some
working
groups.
E
A
Okay,
so
I
I
did
have
a
comment
to
make
on
this,
and
so
this
is
something
I
just
observed
like
interims
work
for
some
set
of
people
and
some
set
of
working
groups,
but
they
don't
work
for
others,
like
I
think
when
michael
was
talking
about
stuff
working,
pretty
well
right,
like
the
iot
cluster
in
the
itf,
it's
almost
like
a
mini
idf,
so
like
people
kind
of
all,
hang
out
together
and
and
they
do
attend
like
working
groups
across
multiple
areas,
so
things
become
easier
like
so,
for
example,
like
you
know
core
in
core
and
then
like
roll
and
lp
van
and
all
those
things
are
kind
of
like
pretty
well
integrated
like
technology-wise,
they
all
work
together,
so
it
becomes
a
little
bit
easier
to
follow
those
things
I
do
see
like
you
know
the
like
both
sides
of
the
argument
here,
but
I
think
the
real
answer
is.
A
It
really
depends
like
some,
some
groups
just
get
along
well
with
interns
and
some
don't
and
we
just
need
to
make
sure
that
like
different
needs
are
accommodated
by
whatever
we
end
up
doing
so.
Thank
you.
G
Yeah,
I'm
up
again
because
this
point
about
interim
is
actually
something
that
we
touched
in
the
in
the
draft
we
discussed
earlier
and
so.
First
of
all,
I
want
to
make
a
point
that
rooms,
and
the
kind
of
meeting
that
you
have
at
this
itf
week
are
usually
not
have
not
the
same
dynamics.
They
kind
of
work
very
differently,
and
that's
also
why
they
might
work,
definitely
well
for
different
groups
and
they
can
achieve
different
goals.
G
G
While
in
the
meeting
week
you
have
much
more
people
who
are
not
that
frequently
reading
the
mailing
list
or
coming
to
the
meetings
and
can
provide
a
different
kind
of
feedback.
And
so
you
should
also
organize
your
meeting
to
accomplish
these
kind
of
things.
And
so
what
I
would
like
to
encourage
shares
is
type
to
use
both
of
these
meeting
forms
appropriately
and
also
consider
if
you
always
need
to
meet
at
the
itf
meeting
or
if
you
have.
G
If
you
are
in
a
phase
with
your
working
group,
where
maybe
interims
are
more
effective
for
you,
for
example,
at
the
beginning
of
a
working
group,
it
does
make
sense
to
have
these
meetings
in
the
meeting
week
because
you
want
to
have
other
people
have
a
look.
But
when
you're
like
close
to
the
end
and
you're
just
rushing
through
the
issues,
maybe
ingrams
are
more
appropriate.
So
there
is
a
little
bit
of
discussion
in
the
draft
and
the
draft
basically
says
it
really
depends
on
the
chairs
how
they
want
to
organize
it.
G
But
if
people
want
to
add
more
text
about
that,
I'm
I'm
happy
to
take
tax
proposals
for
the
draft.
A
Thank
you
maria.
Thank
you
very
much.
I
don't
see
anybody
in
the
queue
and
we're
almost
out
of
time,
so
I
just
give
like
a
couple
of
seconds
for
people
to
like
come
up
to
the
queue
if
they
want
otherwise
we'll
just
wrap.
A
Going
once
twice
and
thrice,
so
thank
you
very
much
folks.
This
has
been
like
a
a
fantastic
meeting.
Thank
you
very
much
and
please
do
comment
on
the
chatter
and
like
we'll,
keep
it
open
for
at
least
the
next
week
for
the
recharge
proposal,
and
then
we
ship
it
off
to
lars.
A
Of
course,
it's
like
still
going
to
be
open
for
comment
after
because,
like
bunch
of
other
people
are
going
to
be
seeing
it,
but
really
try
to
get
in
your
comments
into
the
chatter
before
that,
if
you
can,
but
otherwise
we'll
ship
it
off
to
last
and
we
can
handle
it
after.