FYI, we actually had the meeting targetted as a SIPPING WG adhoc: https://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/08mar/slides/sipping-0/sipping-0_files /frame.htm (Chart 16)
Personally, I was in favor of an interim to discuss that topic as well as other critical WG items. In the past, interims have really helped in progressing key WG items. As I understand, one roadblock for some folks is travel approval (my proposal had been to hold the interim in Dallas before or after the GEOPRIV interim). It might be useful to plan earlier for interims to allow folks to consider this in travel budgets sooner (i.e., some of us do these quarterly and having it in the plan earlier allows it to be approved with all other travel and can be considered/prioritized with other travel requests, whereas if it comes later, it requires special approval and is often challenged given today's business environment). I will note that Keith did try to schedule a teleconference on this topic, however, the quorom of key people were not available. However, in general, I do think regular teleconferences for the WGs with authors to progress key topics would be useful. Recognizing that you can't get everyone all the time, rotating time slots might help. I don't think it's apathy or lack of interest in topics as much as many folks I've communicated with have increased day job workloads, so the amount of time focused on IETF has dramatically increased for some folks. Mary. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean Willis Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 11:02 AM To: Cullen Jennings Cc: [email protected]; Jon Peterson Subject: Re: [Sip] INFO and what to do about it? On Jun 23, 2008, at 9:41 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote: > > On Jun 21, 2008, at 3:57 PM, Dean Willis wrote: > >> Cullen Jennings wrote: >>> Personally, I'd like to see some coherent discussion around it in a >>> WG meeting then try to get to consensus on it. The totally number of >>> people bothering to follow the conversation at this point is >>> extremely low. >> >> We tried to do that in the last meeting, but I seem to remember AD >> intervention taking our agenda time away. > > Dean, a room full a 100+ people in the sipping meeting took a hum and > decided much to my surprise to not add an evening meeting. I realize > we wish there was more time but there is not and it is unlikely there > will be more time in Dublin. The best we can do is carefully pick what > topics we do choose to use the time we do have on. I will note there > was not enough interest in this to get an > interim meeting to happen. I would not exactly describe this as AD > intervention. No, I was talking about the 4 hour agenda request that got cut to 2 hours along with the instruction to "focus only on chartered work". INFO is interesting, but it's not on our milestone list. -- Dean _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
