EODIR Open Meeting @ IETF 124

Agenda

1. Admin and Agenda Bashing (2 min)
2. Systers update (Flo, Carolina)
3. New Participants update (Michelle)
4. Outreach update (Dhruv)
5. WG Chairs Forum update (Karen)
6. Guides update (Wes/Paul/Reese)
7. Tutorials (Karen)
8. AOB

Draft Notes

Admin and Agenda Bashing (2 min)

• Karen provided a brief history/context for the meeting
• Round of introduction...
• Roman explained that the goal was to make general-area activities more visible, better understood, and fully integrated into the official agenda.

Systers update (Flo, Carolina)

• Feedback about IETF 123
  • "Bridging perspectives event" for leadership and systers
    • Feedback shared
    • overall +ve, mixed in terms of content not being right for the audience
    • As an experiment, it was successful, but need to think more about how to take it forward
• IETF 124
  • 2 events: breakfast (Monday) and Thursday (lunch)
  • both well attended
  • primarily networking, discuss on systers charter
  • focus on those attending IETF and retention

New Participants update (Michelle)

• New participant (remote+onsite, including those attended 123): 43%
  • Many return back
• Revised new participant program 2nd run - will do a review, but working well
• Thursday Social Hour - most leadership seen - good networking
  • Wes: Gathering was smaller?
  • New participant - 35 v/s 52 (madrid-IETF123)
  • In line with past social events
• Ketan: gather areas of interest, connect with the right leadership
• Michelle: Guides do that; can identify better in quick connections
• Jay: In new participant program, there was drop-off post-lunch, this time focus on power of the community - revise title and content, rotate presenters. More rotations and backup in future
• Deb: Better name tags/buttons for quick connection, no pigeon-hole into an area
• Michelle: Buttons dont work that well
• Andrew: +ve feedback, returning participants see progress in culture, less hostility
• Mirja: Some find the new too long, earlier it was too short, new participants need help with understanding which session to go to - that should be covered earlier - easy to attend session.
• Jay: We explain it is long agenda, not need to be done in one go.
• Mirja: usually guides do it, but new participant program can cover that to.

Outreach update (Dhruv)

• Dhruv updated on outreach activities - RIPE, CAPIF, ICANN, LACNIC, Indian Governance event. Dhruv clarified that this is to track the outreach done by the community with EODIR providing resources and support. Check wiki.
• Karen - Short broader distribution message to let them know about resources that are available.
• Enko - For hackathon how to get more students?
• Dhruv - Outreach to academia includes this pitch, hackathon chairs have also done things in the past.
• Warren - Do we reach out to academic institutions?
• Dhruv - IRTF does some of this.
• Jay - Greg does some local outreach to academic institutions
• Andrew - Outreach with IRTF for academia make sense. Appreciative of recent outreach activities.

WG Chairs Forum update (Karen)

• The WG Chairs Forum met on Wednesday with a full agenda, generating no specific actions but covering ongoing issues like Notewell use and WG process clarity;
• a helpful resource summary email from the Secretariat was well-received, periodic reminders to chairs will continue, and we plan to more proactively solicit agenda items while avoiding overloaded agendas.

Guides update (Wes/Paul/Reese)

• The guides matches went smoothly overall: one participant’s email landed in spam but was resolved, one mentor never heard back, and a total of 23 matches were made (including three remote), which is slightly above average, with generally positive feedback.
• Trying our best for earlier matches
• Dhruv - do you provide feedback to Guides?
• Wes - we should thank the guides after the fact. We will collect feedback.
• Michelle - Continue collecting informal feedback
• Karen - We should provide best practices for the guides
• Wes - provided in the email
• Mirja - Send a reminder email on thursday to meet again
• Wes - some pushback from guides on assignment later in the week but can send reminder to guides only
• Mirja - Inviting guides to new participants' social is one possibility
• Dhruv - Connect them on IETF slack, asking for async connection during the week
• Wes - can promote it more
• Mirja - Slack channel for new participants on the unofficial slack channel could be explored
• Jay - Send whatsapp message each morning is helpful
• Michelle - We have cohort of 16 folks from Brazil, which was good to see.

Tutorials (Karen)

• Karen: Interim on 17 September that followed extensive GitHub discussions at IETF-123. The session focused on identifying pain points and near-term improvements, noting the divide between experienced GitHub users and those who use it reluctantly for IETF work.
• Three areas for better guidance were highlighted: organizing a WG GitHub workspace, clearer pointers to Martin Thomson’s tooling, and improved documentation on making pull requests.
• Greg and Deb are already developing related materials, but no broader action plan exists yet; the main challenge is not lack of information but difficulty finding concise, accessible guidance.
• The September discussion was useful, and volunteers are welcome to take on specific tasks, as this coordination group depends on others stepping forward to execute work.
• Jean: We are making a PR to Martin Thomson’s repo to include the documentation
• Karen: We are not answering the question of the relationship between Mailing-list and GitHub
• Wes: Feedback from DNS-restructuring, folks are 1-week behind on email and dont check github issues
• Jay: Need broader conversation for tutorial, documentation, chairs, rfc-interest group, this group cannot capture full
• Karen: This started from wgchairs forum and more work is needed
• Mirja: Happy to help. Needs clarity on whats missing in GitHub, maybe a design team that meets on monthly basis
• Rich: Shared info to cindy on what secetariat does, what chairs needs to do?
• Karen: Our focus on gap analysis in documentation. Need cliff notes. 3 group of identified user help
• Mirja: We need content and strategy to communicate
• Ketan: Content is hard to find, it should be concise
• Mirja: More hands on is needed and scale over longer time
• Roman: Need to careful on how normative this guidance on github can be. Each WG does it differently.
• Ketan: put pointers on wg github at the very top to wiki which explain things
• Jay: authors's wiki; chairs' wiki (process wiki); we dont have a general participants wiki -> can move things around
• Warren: We drive folks away because of Github. Some feels github is not required.
• Karen: Providing helpdesk (like tools team)
• Dhruv: Can use Hackathon time as a way to provide the helpdesk
• Andrew: Big barrier if every WG does it differently
• Roman: unless standardized workflow, workflow can be very generic and cant be WG-specific
• Mirja: Tagging is done by authors, there is good unification, happy to help on saturday hackathon, chairs should provide this service and provide help!
• Karen: Encouragement on there is no normative process. Dont tell folks that i am doing it wrong
• Warren: saying submit PR is unhelpful

AOB

• Keep providing us inputs
• Use the Mailing list