[Search] [txt|html|xml|pdf|bibtex] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-duke-shmoo-cancel-meeting)   00   Best Current Practice
          01 02 03 04 05 06 rfc9137                                     
shmoo                                                            M. Duke
Internet-Draft                                         F5 Networks, Inc.
Intended status: Best Current Practice                     9 August 2021
Expires: 10 February 2022


            Considerations for Cancellation of IETF Meetings
                   draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meeting-06

Abstract

   The IETF ordinarily holds three in-person meetings per year to
   discuss issues and advance the Internet.  However, various
   emergencies can make a planned in-person meeting infeasible.  This
   document provides criteria to aid the IETF Administration LLC (LLC),
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), and Internet Research
   Task Force (IRTF) Chair in deciding to postpone, move, or cancel an
   in-person IETF meeting.

Discussion Venues

   This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.

   Discussion of this document takes place on the mailing list
   (shmoo@ietf.org), which is archived at
   https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/shmoo/.

   Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
   https://github.com/martinduke/draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meeting.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 10 February 2022.





Duke                    Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft             Canceling Meetings                August 2021


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.  Code Components
   extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text
   as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Decision Criteria and Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  IETF LLC  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.2.  IESG and IRTF Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Remedies  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.1.  Relocation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  Virtualization  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.3.  Postponement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.4.  Cancellation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  Refunds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   8.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   Appendix A.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Appendix B.  Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     B.1.  Since draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meetings-05 . . . . . . . .   9
     B.2.  Since draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meetings-04 . . . . . . . .   9
     B.3.  Since draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meetings-03 . . . . . . . .   9
     B.4.  Since draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meetings-02 . . . . . . . .   9
     B.5.  Since draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meetings-01 . . . . . . . .   9
     B.6.  Since draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meetings-00 . . . . . . . .   9
     B.7.  Since draft-duke-shmoo-cancel-meetings-01 . . . . . . . .   9
     B.8.  Since draft-duke-shmoo-cancel-meetings-00 . . . . . . . .  10
     B.9.  Since draft-duke-remote-meetings-00 . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10

1.  Introduction

   Among the highlights of the IETF calendar are in-person general
   meetings, which happen three times a year at various locations around
   the world.



Duke                    Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft             Canceling Meetings                August 2021


   Various major events may affect the suitability of a scheduled in-
   person IETF meeting, though for some events this may not be
   immediately obvious.  For example:

   *  A meeting venue itself may unexpectedly close or otherwise be
      unable to meet IETF meeting requirements due to a health issue,
      legal violation, or other localized problem.

   *  A natural disaster could degrade the travel and meeting
      infrastructure in a planned location and make it unethical to
      further burden that infrastructure with a meeting.

   *  War, civil unrest, or public health crisis could make a meeting
      unsafe and/or result in widespread national or corporate travel
      bans.

   *  An economic crisis could sharply reduce resources available for
      travel, resulting in lower expected attendance.

   *  Changes in visa policy or other unexpected governmental
      restrictions might make the venue inaccessible to numerous
      attendees.

   This document provides criteria to aid the IETF Administration LLC
   (LLC), Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), and Internet
   Research Task Force (IRTF) Chair in deciding to postpone, move, or
   cancel an in-person IETF meeting.

2.  Conventions

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

   In this document, the term "venue" refers to both the facility that
   houses the sessions and the official meeting hotel(s), as defined in
   [RFC8718].

3.  Decision Criteria and Roles

   The LLC assesses whether an in-person meeting is logistically and
   financially viable in light of events, and assembles information
   about various travel restrictions that might impact attendance.  The
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) and Internet Research Task
   Force (IRTF) Chair assess if the projected attendance is sufficient
   for a viable in-person meeting.



Duke                    Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft             Canceling Meetings                August 2021


3.1.  IETF LLC

   The LLC is responsible for assessing the suitability of a venue for
   an IETF meeting and is responsible for any reassessment in response
   to a major event that leaves the prior conclusion in doubt.  If such
   an event occurs more than fourteen weeks before the start of the
   scheduled meeting, it is deemed a non-emergency situation.  Later
   events, up to and including the week of a meeting itself, are deemed
   an emergency situation.

   In non-emergency situations, if the LLC determines the scheduled
   meeting clearly cannot proceed (e.g., the venue has permanently
   closed), then it MUST share the reason(s) with the community and MUST
   consult on its proposed remedy.  In less clear cases, the LLC SHOULD
   conduct a formal reassessment process that includes:

   *  Consulting with the community on the timetable of the decision
      process.

   *  Consulting with the community on criteria to assess the impact of
      new developments.

   *  Publishing an assessment report and recommended remedy.

   *  Seeking approval of the IESG and IRTF Chair for the
      recommendation.

   In emergency situations, which lack the time for a consultation
   process, this document provides criteria that have IETF consensus and
   which the LLC MUST apply in its assessment.

   The LLC will collect information about the likely impact to in-person
   attendance of national travel advisories, national and corporate
   travel bans, availability of transportation, quarantine requirements,
   etc. and report the results to the IESG and IRTF Chair.

   These criteria, some of which are derived from Section 3 of
   [RFC8718], apply to venues that are re-evaluated due to an emergency:

   *  Local safety guidelines allow the venue and hotels to host a
      meeting with the expected number of participants and staff.

   *  It is possible to provision Internet access to the venue that
      allows those attending in person to utilize the Internet for all
      their IETF, business, and day-to-day needs; in addition, there
      must be sufficient bandwidth and access for remote attendees.
      Provisions include, but are not limited to, native and unmodified
      IPv4 and IPv6 connectivity, and global reachability; there may be



Duke                    Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft             Canceling Meetings                August 2021


      no additional limitation that would materially impact their
      Internet use.  To ensure availability, it MUST be possible to
      provision redundant paths to the Internet.

   *  A reasonable number of food and drink establishments are open and
      available within walking distance to provide for the expected
      number of participants and staff.

   *  Local health and public safety infrastructure expects to have
      adequate capacity to support an influx of visitors during the
      meeting week.

   Finally, the LLC MUST assess the impact on its own operations,
   including:

   *  The number of critical support staff, contractors, and volunteers
      who can be at the venue.

   *  The financial impact of continuing a meeting, or implementing any
      of the possible remedies.

   The LLC SHOULD cancel an in-person meeting and explore potential
   remedies if it judges a meeting to be logistically impossible or
   inconsistent with its fiduciary responsibilities.

   In the event of considerations this document does not foresee, the
   LLC should protect the health and safety of attendees and staff, as
   well as the fiscal health of the organization, with approval from the
   IESG and IRTF Chair.  The IESG should pursue a later update of this
   document.

3.2.  IESG and IRTF Chair

   If the LLC assesses there are no fundamental logistical or financial
   obstacles to holding a meeting in an emergency situation, the IESG
   and IRTF Chair assess if projected attendance is high enough to
   achieve the benefit of an in-person meeting.  The IESG and IRTF Chair
   SHOULD cancel the in-person meeting if that benefit is insufficient.

   The IESG and IRTF Chair are discouraged from relying on a simple head
   count of expected meeting attendance.  Even dramatically smaller
   meetings with large remote participation may be successful.  In
   addition to the LLC's estimate, the IESG and IRTF Chair might
   consider:

   *  Are many working groups and research groups largely unaffected by
      the restrictions, so that they can operate effectively?




Duke                    Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft             Canceling Meetings                August 2021


   *  Is there a critical mass of key personnel at most working group
      meetings to leverage the advantages of in-person meetings, even if
      many participants are remote?

4.  Remedies

   If a meeting cannot be held at the scheduled time and place, the LLC,
   IESG, and IRTF Chair have several options.  The remedies in this
   section should be considered in light of four principles, presented
   in no particular order:

   *  Hold the scheduled sessions of a meeting in some format.

   *  Provide benefits of in-person interactions when possible.

   *  Avoid exorbitant additional travel expenses due to last minute
      flight changes, etc.

   *  Ensure sufficient time and resources to adequately prepare an
      alternative.

   The following remedies are listed in approximate declining order of
   preference.

4.1.  Relocation

   For attendees, the least disruptive response is to retain the meeting
   week but move it to a more accessible venue.  To the maximum extent
   possible, this will be geographically close to the original venue.
   In particular, the LLC SHOULD meet the criteria in [RFC8718] and
   [RFC8719].

   Relocation that requires new air travel arrangements for attendees
   SHOULD NOT occur less than one month prior to the start of the
   meeting.

4.2.  Virtualization

   The second option, and one that has fewer issues with venue
   availability, is to make a meeting fully online.  This requires
   different IETF processes and logistical operations that are outside
   the scope of this document.









Duke                    Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft             Canceling Meetings                August 2021


4.3.  Postponement

   Although it is more disruptive to the schedules of participants, the
   next best option is to delay a meeting until a specific date, at the
   same venue, at which conditions are expected to improve.  The new end
   date of a meeting must be at least 30 days before the beginning of
   the following IETF meeting, and a meeting MUST begin no earlier than
   30 days after the postponement announcement.

   Due to scheduling constraints at the venue, this will usually not be
   feasible.  However, it is more likely to allow attendees to recover
   at least some of their travel expenses than other options.

   Note that it is possible to both postpone and relocate a meeting,
   though this has the disadvantages of both.

4.4.  Cancellation

   The LLC, IESG, and IRTF Chair may cancel a meeting entirely in the
   event that worldwide conditions make it difficult for attendees to
   even attend online.  Not holding a meeting at all can have wide
   implications, such as effects on the nomination process and seating
   of new officers.

   Cancellation is likely the only practical alternative when
   emergencies occur immediately before or during a meeting, so that
   there is no opportunity to make other arrangements.

5.  Refunds

   The IETF SHOULD NOT reimburse registered attendees for unrecoverable
   travel expenses (airfare, hotel deposits, etc).

   However, there are several cases where full or partial refund of
   registration fees is appropriate:

   *  Cancellation SHOULD result in a full refund to all participants.
      It MAY be prorated if some portion of the sessions completed
      without incident.

   *  Upon postponement, the LLC SHOULD offer refunds to registered
      attendees who claim they cannot attend at the newly scheduled
      time.  Attendees can opt out of receiving a refund.








Duke                    Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft             Canceling Meetings                August 2021


   *  When a meeting is virtualized, the LLC MUST offer to refund
      registered attendees the difference between their paid
      registration fee and the equivalent fee for an online meeting.
      The LLC SHOULD offer refunds to registered attendees who do not
      wish to attend an online meeting.

   *  The LLC SHOULD offer refunds to attendees whose government
      forbids, or has issued a safety advisory against, visits to the
      host venue, even if the in-person meeting will continue.  It
      SHOULD NOT refund cancellations due to employer policy or personal
      risk assessments.

   These provisions intend to maintain trust between the IETF and its
   participants.  However, under extraordinary threats to the solvency
   of the organization, the LLC may suspend them.

6.  Security Considerations

   This document introduces no new concerns for the security of Internet
   protocols.

7.  IANA Considerations

   There are no IANA requirements.

8.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.

   [RFC8718]  Lear, E., Ed., "IETF Plenary Meeting Venue Selection
              Process", BCP 226, RFC 8718, DOI 10.17487/RFC8718,
              February 2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8718>.

   [RFC8719]  Krishnan, S., "High-Level Guidance for the Meeting Policy
              of the IETF", BCP 226, RFC 8719, DOI 10.17487/RFC8719,
              February 2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8719>.








Duke                    Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft             Canceling Meetings                August 2021


Appendix A.  Acknowledgments

   Jay Daley provided extensive input to make this document more usable
   by the LLC.  Many members of the IESG and the SHMOO working group
   also provided useful comments.

Appendix B.  Change Log

B.1.  Since draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meetings-05

   *  Minor changes from IETF review

B.2.  Since draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meetings-04

   *  Threshold for "emergency" changes to 14 weeks

   *  Clarified refund policy

   *  IETF Last Call nits

B.3.  Since draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meetings-03

   *  Clarifications from AD review

B.4.  Since draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meetings-02

   *  Added IRTF to IESG responsibilities

   *  WGLC Nits

B.5.  Since draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meetings-01

   *  Added refund principles for hybrid meetings

B.6.  Since draft-ietf-shmoo-cancel-meetings-00

   *  Jay Daley's nits

   *  Distinguish the emergency and non-emergency process

   *  Eliminated USSTATE/UKFO references

   *  Clarified roles of LLC and IESG

B.7.  Since draft-duke-shmoo-cancel-meetings-01

   *  Change to WG draft




Duke                    Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft             Canceling Meetings                August 2021


B.8.  Since draft-duke-shmoo-cancel-meetings-00

   *  Added mention of IRTF

   *  Discussed consensus on cancellation

B.9.  Since draft-duke-remote-meetings-00

   *  Defined "venue"

   *  Added principles for selecting remedies and rewrote alternatives.

   *  Added local authority travel advisories

   *  Added some criteria from IETF 109

Author's Address

   Martin Duke
   F5 Networks, Inc.

   Email: martin.h.duke@gmail.com





























Duke                    Expires 10 February 2022               [Page 10]