[ncc-services-wg] Re: [local-ir at ripe.net]RIPE 47 Meeting Report

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


[chair hat off]

>> I remember being at the RIPE47 meeting where this was
>> announced as a fait
>> accompli.  What I don't remember was the RIPE47 meeting where
>> there was any
>> real debate or discussion about it.
>
> Hence why we have this issue!

Although I am not sure I would call it fait accompli, there wasn't much 
discussion around it. I can agree with that.

>> On the subject of meetings, it is accepted that mailing list
>> discussions
>> are moved forwards rapidly at the meetings, as we have a
>> chance to discuss
>> things face to face in working groups which in general leads
>> to more rapid
>> conclusion of policy decisions.
>> If we have a new operating method where there are two 'major'
>> RIPE meetings
>> a year, and some 'lesser' committee meetings for the working
>> groups, do we
>> end up with people who have an interest now having to travel
>> to all of the
>> meetings rather than just the current RIPE meetings to ensure that
>> something they care about is not being discussed without them present?
>
> I don't think this is always the case. Travel isn't always required
> for meetings, conference calls could be used to deal with many of
> the issues that are resolved face to face.

I think the face to face meetings provide a great value. And I am also 
not very happy with two meetings per year. I think three would be 
better.

>> So in short, I'm not at all convinced that two meetings a
>> year is a Good
>> Thing, nor am I particularly happy about the way it has been
>> introduced.
>
> Well to me this sounds like a fudge also. I think 1
> meeting per quarter is more than adequate but the length
> of the current RIPE meeting is frankly insane and there
> is absolutely no reason for the meeting to be as long as
> it is.

But these are two different issues. I kind of agree that having 
meetings more frequent, but shorter is a good idea - where "more 
frequent" might equal to three times a year.

> The fundemental issue still remains. There are still
> too many random projects with questionable value going
> on within the "RIPE".

I have no idea what this has to do with meeting frequency. There is a 
well defined process to handle project of the RIPE NCC. Frequency of 
RIPE meetings, no.


- - kurtis -

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.3

iQA/AwUBQDuAcqarNKXTPFCVEQJWUACgi51x9HN0dQS7bGQBO+EHCMapEo0AoJKl
CXWO4KToOwrz3BP5jj/C1u4b
=3wNR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----