Subject: Re: [Dbound] DBOUND bar BoF

From: =JeffH <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2014 13:34:23 -0800

> A DBOUND bar BoF (i.e., unofficial IETF meeting) will be held Tuesday
 > morning 0900 - 1100 HST in Iolani Suite 3, in the Tapa Tower.

well, I'd like to participate but need to also attend UTA which is in that 
timeslot (based on UTA agenda I can perhaps skip the first hour of UTA 
unless they run ahead of schedule).

how come a daytime slot and not an evening get-together? (but then y'all 
shouldn't make changes just for a slacker like me)

thanks,

=JeffH

---

From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2014 16:50:26 -0500

On 11/06/2014 04:34 PM, =JeffH wrote:
> well, I'd like to participate but need to also attend UTA which is in
> that timeslot (based on UTA agenda I can perhaps skip the first hour of
> UTA unless they run ahead of schedule).
> 

I'm also going to have to prioritize UTA over a DBOUND BoF.  planning a
BoF like this during scheduled non-BoF meetings seems not so good.

	--dkg

---

From: Casey Deccio <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 17:06:33 -0500

> BoF like this during scheduled non-BoF meetings seems not so good.

The conflict with non-BoF meetings that would make DBOUND-interested
participants have to choose was, of course, unintentional.  The meeting
time is not set in stone, and if there's sufficient interest/demand to move
it to another time (or hold a "true" BoF), that could be arranged.  I was
simply looking first for daytime slots where it would not conflict, with
evening slots being a fallback--to maximize use of the day.  That was the
intent of my call for interest and conflict earlier in the week.

That being said, there will likely always be some conflict for someone,
whether it's day or evening.

Casey

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 20:36:58 -0500

On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 05:06:33PM -0500, Casey Deccio wrote:
> it to another time (or hold a "true" BoF), that could be arranged. 

The conflict with other WG sessions is also why I probably can't make
it, FWIW, but my schedule is pretty bad no matter what you do.

I'm pretty sure that the reason "real" BoFs came to have so much
ceremony around them was because scheduling these weeks is so hard.

A
-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]

---

From: Kurt Andersen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 19:38:35 -1000

If it is feasible to find a time that does not conflict with UTA, that
would be great. There seems to be a lot of cross-interest between the two
topics - I have to count myself into that place of conflict too, though I
might land on the DBOUND side.

--Kurt Andersen

---

From: Warren Kumari <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 13:09:31 -1000

> shouldn't make changes just for a slacker like me)

Yes, this confused me too -- I thought I couldn't come (because of
DPRIVE), but apparently that is next slot, so I think I can make it...

W

>
> thanks,
>
> =JeffH
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dbound mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dbound

-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf

---

From: Casey Deccio <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 15:05:41 -1000

On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Warren Kumari <[email-masked]> wrote:

> that

Please see the doodle poll:

http://doodle.com/neef2zviq9w4uyud

Cheers,
Casey