[idn] Why do IETF people focus so much on face-to-face meetings (like London)...??

["Jim Fleming" <JimFleming@prodigy.net>]

Why do IETF people focus so much on face-to-face meetings (like London)...??
when the Internet allows them to meet at anytime, in 3D, face-to-face...


Jim Fleming
http://www.unir.com
Mars 128n 128e
http://www.unir.com/images/architech.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/address.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/headers.gif
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt
http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/tpipv6/start.asp
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12213.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12223.html


----- Original Message -----
From: "Marc Blanchet" <Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca>
To: <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Cc: <jseng@pobox.org.sg>
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 11:05 PM
Subject: [idn] wg next steps


> Co-chairs with the advice of the area directors, technical advisors and
> other IESG members would like to propose the following next steps, in
order
> to narrow down the solution space and build concensus:
>
> 0. On June 28th 2001 23h59 GMT, temporarily close submission of new wg
> documents.
>
> 1. put in a wg document pool (named pool W) all documents that have a
> demonstrated "core of interest". This core of interest would be defined as
> having 7 people strongly supporting the proposal. The current candidates
> would be idna and nameprep which receive 36 votes in the strawpoll.
>
> 2. put all other documents in a temporary document pool (pool T). The
> authors of those documents are asked to write new documents that could
> demonstrate a core of interest for their document or to merge documents
> together to build that needed core of interest. Deadline is the London
> cut-off date for documents: July 13th 2001. Any new document should be
sent
> as individual submission (i.e. draft-yourname-...), but will be listed in
> the wg web page and announced to the wg mailing list.
>
> 3. July 14th, All documents demonstrating a core of interest (pool W) will
> be placed as wg documents.  All others (pool T) will have to be
resubmitted
> to the internet-drafts@ietf.org by the authors as individual submissions.
> Only the documents who are in the wg document pool will be discussed as
> focus of the wg.
>
> 4. London IETF. Find agreement and concensus.
>
> Notes:
> - If multiple solution strategies (as example: ace now and utf8 later,
> ace-utf8 together, ace with directory,...) are suggested, they should be
> described in a document and submitted through the same process.
> - Most of the London agenda would be to build concensus
> - the two pools of documents will be identified in the wg web page.
>
> We would like to have comments and support from the working group on this
> process. If agreement is reached, then we will proceed.
>
> James & Marc, co-chairs
>
>