Internet DRAFT - draft-atlas-community-hubs
draft-atlas-community-hubs
Network Working Group A. Atlas
Internet-Draft Juniper Networks
Intended status: Informational February 16, 2017
Expires: August 20, 2017
IETF Community Hubs
draft-atlas-community-hubs-00
Abstract
IETF Community Hubs are geographically-focused groups that facilitate
participation in IETF activities. An IETF Community Hub may have
different focuses, depending upon the interests of those
participating, such as cross-area learning, outreach, mentoring,
problem refinement, implementation and interop testing, and social.
An IETF Community Hub's focuses and the energy of its coordinators
will determine what types of activities are organized. Sample
activities may include sessions of technical talks, social get-
togethers, remote hubs during some IETF WG meetings, hackathons, etc.
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 http://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 August 20, 2017.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 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
(http://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
Atlas Expires August 20, 2017 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IETF Community Hubs February 2017
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
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. Benefits for Existing IETFers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3. Benefits for Outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1. Extending the High-Bandwidth Part of Plenary Meetings . . 5
2.2. Working Group Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3. Building a Connected Local Community . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. What Has Been Tried in IETF-Hub-Boston . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. Getting Started . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. Coordinators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. Picking Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.4. Social Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.5. Technical Talks Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.6. Remote Hubs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.7. Publicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.8. Tools Used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Future Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction
The IETF needs and wants to become more effective at outreach and
growth of active participants, timely in developing needed
technology, and maintain expertise in broad knowledge and review of
Internet technologies. IETF Community Hubs are one experimental
approach that may assist in these goals. Currently, there is one
active IETF Community Hub in the Boston, Massachusetts area; it has
been meeting periodically since May 2016.
For a local group to be effective, it must either provide value to
its participants to retain them or be able to do excellent outreach
and bring those newcomers to actively participate in the IETF, but
ideally both. When doing outreach, having active IETFers involved to
provide connections to the IETF community and mentoring on how the
IETF works and how to be effective in the IETF is critical. People
come to the IETF to get technical work done and solve problems,
usually relevant to their day-job's organization. Some also come to
learn and communicate back to their organizations about technology
Atlas Expires August 20, 2017 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IETF Community Hubs February 2017
for internal use and implementation or deployment. An effective
local group needs to consider how to support interested individuals
in these goals.
1.1. Terminology
In preparation for IETF 95, ISOC starting encouraging and running
Remote Hubs [I-D.oflaherty-ietf-remote-hubs-lac]
[I-D.elkins-ietf-remote-hubs], where there were local meetings
centered around remote participation to a Working Group meeting
during a plenary IETF meeting. Sometimes, such meetings might have a
social aspect or IETF-related or introductory talks.
The appropriate terminology to use is still under discussion. For
clarity, in this document, the following is used.
IETF Community Hub (ICH) This is a geographically-focused group that
holds periodic meetings and activities related to the IETF
locally.
Remote Hub This is a local meeting that is centered around remote
participation to a Working Group meeting during a plenary IETF
meeting. As Remote Hubs are held periodically in the same
geography, there may develop an associated ICH.
Hub Meeting Any type of meeting held by an ICH - this could include
a Remote Hub.
1.2. Benefits for Existing IETFers
The benefits for existing IETFers can be social, educational, and
assist in getting IETF work done. First, attending a Hub meeting
gives a chance to see other IETFers in an environment that isn't
under intense time pressure, as many plenary IETF meetings are. A
social Hub meeting (e.g. lunch, dinner, party, etc.) is a chance to
catch up with friends and colleagues and chat about what interesting
work they and mutual acquaintances are working on. This provides an
opportunity for individual focused discussion about on-going work and
an environment where folks can be introduced to others who may be
interested in or knowledgeable about their work.
For attendees, a technical talks session provides an opportunity to
learn a little about technology or problems in the broad variety that
is of interest to the IETF community. It is a chance to discuss how
that work is connected to other IETF work, to find cross-area
concerns that need handling before IETF Last Call when they can be
better addressed, and to provide suggestions as to whom in the IETF
community might be interested so that the work can get better review.
Atlas Expires August 20, 2017 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IETF Community Hubs February 2017
For presenters, it is a low energy way of getting immediate feedback
and sparking interest in the document. For newer IETFers, it can
provide guidance on common considerations, introductions to others
who might help, and advice on how to navigate Working Group
discussions.
At a minimum, going to an IETF Community Hub (ICH) meeting is a
reminder of the IETF work that an IETFer needs to get done and can be
a spur to make progress - whether to discuss it at the meeting or
simply as a reminder that the IETF community keeps working between
plenary meetings. It also provides that human element of seeing and
feeling that other people are interested in discussing one's work -
which is frequently its own encouragement.
One of the tricks to getting work done well in the IETF is finding
the small group of people who deeply care about that work and having
a complex technical conversation to resolve all the considerations.
Finding that group of people frequently depends on the social network
and an ICH offers the opportunity to grow more and thicker
connections between those who attend, which can then help with
introductions and recommendations on whom to talk to about work and
what drafts would be useful to review.
1.3. Benefits for Outreach
While we all participate as individuals in the IETF, it frequently
takes more than an individual's interest to allow a person to
regularly attend plenary IETF meetings. Effective participation,
such as reviewing drafts and considering serious implementation or
deployment, also frequently benefits from one's day-job organization
being highly supportive. If a person isn't familiar with the IETF or
how to get involved or why other individuals and organizations find
it worthwhile, it is much harder to make a case for time or travel
funding. A ICH can provide a mechanism for interested individuals to
learn a bit more what the IETF is like and start determining how they
might be effective.
It is also very useful for implementers, operators, and others to be
able to participate effectively in a low cost and low effort fashion.
Obviously, working groups, with their associated mailing lists, are
the mechanism by which work is done - but being able to meet other
active IETFers and get advice and introductions can be quite helpful
in facilitating progress.
ICHs also provide a potential mechanism for sharing knowledge and
perspectives with other interested local communities, such as Network
Operator Groups and research communities.
Atlas Expires August 20, 2017 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IETF Community Hubs February 2017
2. Observations
2.1. Extending the High-Bandwidth Part of Plenary Meetings
A plenary IETF meeting brings together many in the IETF community and
there are formal and informal activities to facilitate mingling,
communication, and progress. Significant work has been done on and
continues to be improved for remote participation in the formal
Working Group meetings. Holding a Remote Hub session is also a way
that an ICH can encourage local discussion or socialization around
participating in the WG meetings.
A significant benefit of a plenary IETF meeting is the informal side-
meetings and hallway conversations that happen. This is where there
can be time to have complex technical discussions and work out
compromises and solutions that allow drafts to progress. This can
also be where one can explain the motivations and context and
overview of a draft to someone who may be interested and able to
provide suggestions. Obviously, it is challenging to duplicate the
serendipity and interactions in an ICH are primarily with those who
happen to be geographically co-located, but this type of interactions
can be encouraged via meeting formats.
Having opportunities to interact in person takes advantage of some
commonalities of human interactions that are important to consider.
First, for those fluent in the relevant language, a spoken
conversation can have more nuance, significantly higher bandwidth and
interactivity than an email discussion. Second, even a brief in-
person meeting builds a social connection and broadens appreciation
of the others' character, interests, and motivations. Complex
discussion and negotiation occurs more smoothly and rapidly between
those who have met in person even once.
2.2. Working Group Interactions
Participation in even very active Working Groups is seldom more than
a couple hundred IETFers. While there are some geographical
localities that have comparatively dense participation in the IETF,
it is not likely that more than a handful of participants will be
geographically close. There may be more people interested in
following a WG; they may occasionally review documents, may be
implementing, and/or may be deploying or operating networks using the
WG's technology. The existence of such people in a locality is
highly dependent upon the WG and the active companies and
universities in the area. It could be useful to focus on particular
relevant WGs for remote hubs with associated technical discussion if
it seems there are a number of local people interested. Obviously,
Atlas Expires August 20, 2017 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IETF Community Hubs February 2017
discussion and agreements about working group drafts happen on the WG
mailing lists.
2.3. Building a Connected Local Community
Some of the benefit of having ICH meetings is to allow those local to
meet and interact, which facilitates mentoring and discussions. If
all the meetings are during plenary IETF meeting, then those IETFers
that do attend in person will miss the ICH meetings and not be able
to assist as easily in mentoring or facilitating discussions.
3. What Has Been Tried in IETF-Hub-Boston
The Boston IETF Community Hub has held social meetings, technical
talks meetings, and remote hubs. Meetings have been at companies
that have volunteered conference rooms or at restaurants for social
get-togethers.
3.1. Getting Started
The Boston Hub started based on a request for a mailing list with a
desire for a local social meeting. The concept of community hubs was
sparked by ISOC's work with Remote Hubs in Latin and South America.
Asking for and doing introductions on the ietf-hub-boston mailing
list definitely helped with realizing whom else was in the area and
something of their interests.
3.2. Coordinators
It has proved extremely useful to have multiple coordinators for
discussing what to do and trading off the work of organizing a
meeting. There are three coordinators. The main restriction on
number is coordinating and making sure that responsibilities are
clear. So far, different coordinators have been responsible for
different meetings.
3.3. Picking Locations
The greater Boston area pulls from a couple hour radius and has to
trade-off considerations in terms of transportation, parking,
traffic, and convenience for different sets of people. . The
locations have ranged from Akamai in Kendall Square in Cambridge, to
a restaurant by the Alewife T station, to 128 Technology in
Burlington to Juniper Networks in Westford. It is likely that
meeting locations will continue to be varied so that inconvenience is
balanced.
Atlas Expires August 20, 2017 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IETF Community Hubs February 2017
3.4. Social Meetings
These have been a retirement party, a dinner, a lunch, and a planned
meet at a pub with dinner. They've allowed small and group
conversation. Attendance varies between 10 and about 20.
3.5. Technical Talks Meetings
There have been two meetings and two more are planned. To find
talks, volunteers were asked from on the ietf-hub-boston mailing
list. Most talks are targeted at 10-15 minutes with another 10-15
minutes of discussion. The first meeting was 2 hours and the second
was 3. The first meeting had one 45 minute topic because there was
no way to cover the material more quickly; the depth seemed to be
welcomed and appreciated. Topics for these meetings ranged widely
and included information-centric networking (ICN), NTP Security,
Banana BoF overview, Happy Earballs - Coping with Dual-Stack
Connectivity Issues in SIP, Homenet Naming and DNSSD.
For the meeting in February 2017, the talks will be focused on
privacy and security; RSVPs for that meeting are around 35. In
April, the expectation is to have a mixture of topics.
These meetings attracted between 15-20 people - mostly experienced
IETFers with a few new folks. After the meeting, a slightly smaller
group has gone out to dinner. Both of the meetings ran over time by
about 30 minutes and there was energetic discussion during them. The
venue used (128 Technology volunteered space) had an option for
informal gathering afterwards, but because the meeting ran long both
times, folks just went to dinner.
3.6. Remote Hubs
For IETF 95 and IETF 96, there have been Remote Hubs at Juniper
Networks in Westford. The Working Groups covered have been focused
in the Routing Area, because there are a number of interested
developers there. The Remote Hubs were open and did have a couple
non-Juniper attendees. In addition, each time, one evening there was
a social dinner. No Remote Hubs were tried for IETF 97 due to the
time difference. There are plans to hold another Remote Hub during
IETF 98. Feedback about Remote Hubs on ietf-hub-boston has indicated
that while there are many WGs not covered, there aren't even small
groups of folks interested in particular other working groups; the
spread is too large. Interest in driving to another location to
remotely participate in a WG was quite limited.
Atlas Expires August 20, 2017 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IETF Community Hubs February 2017
3.7. Publicity
Limited publicity has been done and this is an area that could use
significant improvement and suggestions. One effort that was started
in time for the February 21 meeting is identifying a list of active
Internet-Draft authors in the area and notifying them about the
meeting and the ietf-hub-boston@ietf.org mailing list.
3.8. Tools Used
The mailing list has been used to ask for talks, do introductions,
and discuss meeting logistics. Doodle polls have been used for RSVPs
to the meetings. It would be very useful to have a common wiki to
provide a reference for various publicity efforts to local groups and
to record the previous and future meetings. This would also be
potentially useful for IETFers traveling to the area, since they
could then know if there is a Hub meeting happening. There is some
investigation of using MeetUp to help with publicity and
coordination. It would be useful to use a common calendar so
meetings are on it in advance and others traveling to the area could
see when a meeting was going to happen.
4. Future Growth
If this experiment seems useful, additional IETF Community Hubs may
be started. What is most useful depends in part on the local
community of IETFers and others interested. How coordinators can
volunteer, step down, and so on is not yet clear. Ideas on
interactions into the IETF organization - if such is needed - still
need to be discussed. [a]there's something amusing about using gdocs
for markdown.
5. Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Christian O'Flaherty, Nalini Elkins, Alvaro
Retana, Rich Salz, and Dale Worley for the discussions and/or review.
6. Informative References
[I-D.oflaherty-ietf-remote-hubs-lac]
Retana, A., Martinez, C., Elkins, N., and S. Romano,
"Remote Hubs in Latin America", draft-oflaherty-ietf-
remote-hubs-lac-00 (work in progress), March 2016.
[I-D.elkins-ietf-remote-hubs]
Elkins, N., Retana, A., and A. Raje, "Remote Hub Status
and Definition", draft-elkins-ietf-remote-hubs-00 (work in
progress), March 2016.
Atlas Expires August 20, 2017 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IETF Community Hubs February 2017
Author's Address
Alia Atlas
Juniper Networks
Email: akatlas@juniper.net
Atlas Expires August 20, 2017 [Page 9]
