| Internet-Draft | Canceling Meetings | June 2021 |
| Duke | Expires 12 December 2021 | [Page] |
The IETF holds three in-person meetings per year to discuss and understand issues. However, various emergencies can make a planned in-person meeting infeasible. This document provides criteria for making this judgment.¶
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.¶
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 12 December 2021.¶
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.¶
Among the highlights of the IETF calendar are in-person general meetings, which happen three times a year at various locations around the world.¶
Various major events may affect the suitability of a scheduled in-person IETF meeting, though for some this may not be immediately obvious. For example:¶
This document provides criteria to aid the IETF Administration LLC (LLC) in deciding to postpone, move, or cancel an in-person IETF meeting.¶
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).¶
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.¶
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 twelve 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 consult with the community on the reason(s) and its proposed remedy. In less clear cases, the LLC SHOULD conduct a formal reassessment process that includes:¶
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, quarantine requirements, etc. and report the results to the IESG.¶
These criteria, some of which are derived from Section 3 of [RFC8718], apply to venues that are re-evaluated due to an emergency:¶
Finally, the LLC MUST assess the impact on its own operations, including:¶
The LLC SHOULD cancel a meeting 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 a plan to seek a later update of this document.¶
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 is 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 might consider:¶
If a meeting cannot be held at the scheduled time and place, the LLC and IESG have several options. The remedies in this section should be considered in light of four principles, presented in no particular order:¶
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 strive to 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.¶
The second option, and one that has fewer issues with venue availability, is to make a meeting fully remote. This requires different IETF processes and logistical operations that are outside the scope of this document.¶
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 1 month 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.¶
As a last resort, the LLC and IESG may cancel a meeting entirely. This is a last resort in the event that worldwide conditions make it difficult for attendees to even attend remotely. Not holding a meeting at all can have wide implications, such as 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.¶
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:¶
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.¶
This document introduces no new concerns for the security of internet protocols.¶
There are no IANA requirements.¶