Re: Interim meeting around London?

I'm in favor of a short meeting simply because our cadence of interims and
their implicit deadlines was worked well - it has provided incentives to
keep the development efforts moving. As evidence I can cite 5 requests in
the last few days for updated firefox draft -09 builds for folks to test
with. That's great - its working. keep going. regular ietf weeks don't
provide the same incentive.


On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>
> We’ve previously talked about the possibility of another interim meeting
> piggybacking upon IETF London, much as we did for Berlin/Hamburg.
>
> Since there are only about four weeks between our Zurich interim and
> London, and we haven’t had our Zurich meeting yet, it’s not clear how
> useful that meeting would be.
>
> One the one hand, we’re trying to finish the “core” specification soon,
> and it would be good to keep velocity up and close any lingering issues
> around the spec. On the other, the small gap between meetings means that
> it’s unlikely we’ll have big spec or implementation updates to
> discuss/interop.
>
> Ideally, we’d decide *after* Zurich, but that would make the travel and
> meeting planning cycle really tight.
>
> I think the options are roughly:
>
> a) Feb 26-28 or 27-28 in London (avoiding overlap with the STRINT workshop
> as necessary)
> b) Mar 8 in London (one-day Saturday meeting to clean up any dangling
> issues)
> c) Wait until April or June, if necessary, location TBD
>
> If we did (b), I’d request that the HTTPbis meeting during IETF be late in
> the week, to make people’s travel a bit more convenient.
>
> I’d be interested to hear what people think. Note that this is not a vote
> :)
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>
>
>