Subject: [codec] Purpose of the CODEC BOF

From: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 13:49:08 -0700

Now that the new agenda is out, few comments on email threads so far ...

BOFs get run for lots of reasons but the primary purpose of this BOF  
is to get input to help answer the question of if the IETF should form  
a WG to do this work or not. I hope the agenda provides time to talk  
about the important issues for making this decision.

I expect many of the arguments made on the list (and repeated on the  
list) to be repeated again in the BOF. This is needed so that a broad  
range of people participating can hear the arguments and give input.

Input from the mailing list, jabber chat room, and the people in the  
room will be considered. You do not need to be in the meeting room at  
IETF 75 to have input.

Cullen <RAI AD>

---

From: Stephan Wenger <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:35:01 -0700

Hi Cullen,

You state in absolutely clear terms the main reason for a BOF.  Why do I
miss those clear terms in the updated agenda?  Why is agenda item #3 not
called "Should the IETF perform work towards an Internet Codec?"

Let me also repeat my earlier suggestion: in order to be time-efficient, it
would be helpful if we could avoid repeating known arguments over and over.
One way to do this would be that you would summarize the state of discussion
very early in the meeting---and ask not to repeat those known arguments.

A final note on the chair selection: Jean-Marc and Jason are both glowing
supporters of this, in my opinion, ill-conceived effort.  While it is not
entirely unusual for a BOF to be chaired by proponents, I wonder whether
less involved chairs would not be a better choice in such a heavily
contested BOF.  Perhaps it would be good if a graybeard would run this show?

Jason, Jean-Marc, please understand that I don't doubt that you would do
your best to run the meeting as impartially as you can.  I do doubt, though,
that this would be enough.  Speaking from own experience, if you will :-)

Regards,
Stephan

On 7/8/09 1:49 PM, "Cullen Jennings" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> codec mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec

---

From: Jason Fischl <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:15:56 -0700

> called "Should the IETF perform work towards an Internet Codec?"
The intention with the revised agenda was that items 3 to 6 were  
addressing the issues that will help the BOF decide the answer to the  
question, "Should the IETF perform work towards an Internet Codec?"  
Agenda item 7 asks the question after we've had the discussion.

I'd also like to ask the participants on the list to contribute any  
additional agenda items that are missing to help answer the above  
question.

> very early in the meeting---and ask not to repeat those known  
I think it is a good suggestion to summarize the arguments made on the  
list at the start of the meeting. I will put together a list of these  
arguments and circulate them as new topics on the mailing list.   
However, I do think that we need to have these arguments in the  
meeting again to help make an informed decision.