- From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 11:29:41 -0800
- To: William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>
- Cc: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAP+FsNceRwrvHeWsi0i-7MVFzwy4_bZr5U8L-VXKChDFsFJAhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Things inevitably come up after the regular course of IETF meetings, and being able to discuss them right away is useful. I wouldn't mind a single day, immediately after the regular week's meetings, but anything more than that seems like a waste of time. -=R On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 10:54 AM, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>wrote: > I like Patrick's point. My inclination is that if we need time to > discuss actual stuff, we should schedule (c). But for interop reasons, > a short (do we even need a full day?) meeting around London might be > good. > > On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 4:40 AM, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com> > wrote: > > 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/ > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > >
Received on Thursday, 9 January 2014 19:30:08 UTC