Subject: As side-effect that should be clarified (was: Re: IETF 107 Vancouver In-Person Meeting Cancelled)

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 18:57:06 -0400

Hi.

While I share the appreciation of others for what must have been
a difficult decision and support it (whether I would have made
the same decision or not is irrelevant, especially because I
don't have the information the IESG clearly solicited and
obtained), my recollection is that we have a series of dates and
actions tied to the first IETF meeting of the year (see RFC 8713
for an example).  The turnover dates for the IESG, IAB, etc.,
are (therefore) tied to that meeting.

If the meeting is "cancelled", rather than, e.g., being replaced
with a virtual one, the first meeting of 2020 would be the one
in Madrid at the end of July.  Assuming our intention is not to
delay the changeover of assorted Nomcom-selected bodies, I hope
someone has looked at the appropriate specifications and started
working on workarounds or will do so soon.

Yes, this is a procedural nit, but it is one that could come
back to haunt us if it, and the transition, were not handled in
an orderly way.

thanks,
   john

---

From: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:44:06 +0000

John

Indeed side-effects, but, they were taken care of. 

The IESG still needs a couple of hours/days to finalize the details but the meeting plenary is not cancelled, it will become virtual ;-) I.e., deployed by using our own technology

-éric

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf <[email-masked]> on behalf of John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tuesday, 10 March 2020 at 23:58
To: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Subject: As side-effect that should be clarified (was: Re: IETF 107 Vancouver In-Person Meeting Cancelled)

    Hi.

    
    
    thanks,
       john

---

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 19:24:52 -0500

On 3/10/2020 5:57 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
> with a virtual one...

John --

Please refer back to the original message in this thread, an excerpt of 
which is quoted below. Thanks.

On 3/10/2020 2:10 PM, The IESG wrote:
> The IESG is working on an alternative all-virtual agenda for the week of March 21-27 with a limited schedule adapted to accommodate the time zones of as many participants as possible.

/a

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 00:52:16 -0400

--On Tuesday, March 10, 2020 19:24 -0500 Adam Roach
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>> If the meeting is "cancelled", rather than, e.g., being
>> replaced with a virtual one...
> 
> 
> John --
> 
> Please refer back to the original message in this thread, an
> excerpt of which is quoted below. Thanks.
> 
> 
>> The IESG is working on an alternative all-virtual agenda for
>> the week of March 21-27 with a limited schedule adapted to
>> accommodate the time zones of as many participants as
>> possible.

Adam,

I did read that.  I also read the subject line of the
announcement (quoted above), which I believe contains the words
"cancelled" and did not say, for example, "IETF 107 will be held
without an in-person meeting in Vancouver".  I'm glad the IESG
has this under control on behalf of the community, but I hope
you can understand the concern resulting from that terminology.

thanks,
   john