>> So, an actual greenfield deployment :-)
IPv6-only?
If you will prefer that and others who will deploy, I think this is complicated as you can see IPv6-only deployment is not successful with black notes in mind that still IPv4 is preferred as a solution that no one feel there is a problem with it.
But you can ask foreigners everywhere, whether they deployed IPv6 or not and you will get a clear answer or you can arrange for an online survey to get a better and faster result.
Khaled Omar
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 12:40 AM
To: IETF Discussion <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Egypt as the next venue.
Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg=40ericsson.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Egypt is in the process of building a new capital city from scratch, so
> we should send the planners the meeting venue documents and ask them to
> fulfil all criteria.
So, an actual greenfield deployment :-)
IPv6-only?
Andrew G. Malis <agmalis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Also, there's a list of currently scheduled IETF meetings at
> https://www.ietf.org/how/meetings/upcoming/ . As you can see, the earliest
> uncommitted meeting date (in terms of location) is IETF 113 in March 2022.
> Of course, whether or not any of those meetings turn out to be virtual-only
> depends on the status of the pandemic at that time.
Also, I suspect that in cancelling 107 and 108 (and 109?) that the LLC will wind up with hotel credits that the LLC will prefer to spend there.
That's what happened when 102 moved from SFO->YUL: we wound up with a 160K credit with the SFO Hilton, and I think that the LLC has already re-scheduled that one. (We had, I understand, booked two meetings at the same time)
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [
] mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
