Re: last call - Draft Agenda - 56th IETF

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>]

In message <2100910.1046302639@localhost>, Harald Tveit Alvestrand writes:
>
>
>--On 26. februar 2003 15:26 +0800 Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
>
>>>> So how about switching Seamboy and either IPR or RDDP on Monday morning?
>>>> This would put Seamboy on Monday and either IPR or RDDP at 13:00 on
>>>> Thurs.?
>>>> Any objections?
>>> Yes. We are likely to have a hundred or more tourists at IPR.
>>> Moving the meeting at the last minute might be tempting, but would not
>>> be  an optimal long-term strategy.
>>
>> let me be sure i understand.  because a bunch of lawyers and tourists
>> may be interested in trying to stack a wg meeting, it should be treated
>> specially, and have scheduling privileges that normal wgs do not?
>
>When considering a working group that forms part of the IETF's basic 
>structure for making standards, and which at the moment has a large "public 
>interface", and where we've encouraged people who are part of the Internet 
>community but not normally part of the IETF community to show up, and there 
>is a highly controversial issue on the table for which we want to make sure 
people can plan ahead on being there if they think they can/should 
>contribute - yes, that group should have priority in the scheduling.
>
>In my opinion.

I have no problem with that.

But -- do we want to make sure people know that they have to register 
-- and pay -- to attend the session?


		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me)
		http://www.wilyhacker.com (2nd edition of "Firewalls" book)