<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">if many of us are there, maybe it would be useful to convene otherwise in an additional slot for a more casual conversation. marika, do you know who will be there and who won’t?<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">EN</div><div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Feb 4, 2017, at 6:08 AM, Seun Ojedeji <<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com" class="">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="auto" class="">Hello,<div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">I would have easily added a +1 to a longer face 2 face meeting as well. However as I understand it, we are only trying to take advantage of the ICANN58 meeting hence this is not a meeting specifically planned for us which means not all members will be available physically. </div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">I would suggest we do a check on how many people will be present physically and if the number is significant (paying attention to community diversity) then we could proceed with a prolonged meeting. Otherwise it will be difficult for remote participation to remain active beyond 90min (120min max).</div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">That said, we also need to note that an extension could also have implications on the schedule of various communities who have already prepared their agenda in a certain way. We need to avoid conflicts of schedule as much as possible.</div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">Regards<br class=""><br class=""><div data-smartmail="gmail_signature" dir="auto" class="">Sent from my LG G4<br class="">Kindly excuse brevity and typos</div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote">On Feb 4, 2017 10:27, "Daniel Dardailler" <<a href="mailto:danield@w3.org" class="">danield@w3.org</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution" class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 2017-02-02 19:13, Marika Konings wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi Daniel,<br class="">
<br class="">
Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 local<br class="">
time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the CCWG to<br class="">
decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, but it is<br class="">
easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date.<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
I'll be there as well.<br class="">
<br class="">
I'm a bit surprised by seeing only 90 minutes allocated for a f2f. I hardly see how we can discuss, let alone resolve, more than a couple of issues in this timeframe, especially since it's our first f2f, so lots of "get to know each other" overhead.<br class="">
<br class="">
Or maybe I'm confused and this f2f will not be a working group meeting (making progress on our issue list) but more of a report to the community kind of event ?<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
Related to ICANN WG f2f, I have a few questions.<br class="">
<br class="">
So far, I haven't seen any dramatic difference in the way this group is run vs. a W3C working group developping a technical specification. We also have teleconfs, we have email exchanges (and documents being edited in parallel), but all our WG f2f are at least one full day, sometimes 2 or 3 days long. And they usually have 3 of those per year (besides those held at our plenary). IETF is similar I think.<br class="">
<br class="">
The rationale is that f2f, given their higher communication bandwidth, are where most progress are made in resolving issues, and also that of course it costs a lot of money to gather 20 experts in one location, so better use their time effectively.<br class="">
<br class="">
Maybe there is a difference between a f2f run as part of an ICANN plenary, and an isolated WG f2f ?<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br class="">
Best regards,<br class="">
<br class="">
Marika<br class="">
<br class="">
On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <<a href="mailto:danield@w3.org" target="_blank" class="">danield@w3.org</a>> wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people<br class="">
need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark.<br class="">
<br class="">
Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ?<br class="">
And if we don't know yet, when will we know ?<br class="">
<br class="">
Thanks.<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
______________________________<wbr class="">_________________<br class="">
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" target="_blank" class="">Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org</a><br class="">
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/l<wbr class="">istinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds</a></blockquote></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" class="">Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org</a><br class="">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds</div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>