> On 3/24/08, Brian Dickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Eric Gray wrote:
> >
> > > This sort of scheduling problem is very well known
> > > to be NP hard and trying to meet the scheduling conflict
> > > matrix for 1500 to 2500 people would make the "N" large.
> > >
> >
> > Universities have been doing this successfully for class scheduling for
> > many years with great success. I would not necessarily classify it as
> > "hard".
> >
> Define "successfully".
>
> Having been locked out of more than one course because of scheduling
> conflicts, I would suggest that "successfully" to the university may
> not be perceived as "successfully" to the students.
I agree. I had to get special dispensation to miss a lecture
each week for one course. I also had to arrange for someone
to take notes for me for that lecture. Definitely sub-optimal.
> Which, come to think of it, is the same position IETF finds itself in:
> replace "university" with "IETF" and "students" with "attendees".
>
> --
> Clint (JOATMON) Chaplin
> Principal Engineer
> Corporate Standardization (US)
> SISA
> _______________________________________________
> IETF mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
