I'm not in rush, that’s why I want the decision that will be taken will not make any one be blamed later, as long as the meeting pre-re1uisits will be achieved, then lets do it.
Khaled Omar
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 10:52 PM
To: ietf <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Call for comments: Proposals for exploratory IETF meetings
Khaled,
It took 20 years to get Madrid on-board ...
Now there is a clear process, but the evaluation is not a fast process and most of the time venues are contracted, if possible 3-5 years in advance.
So, be patient!
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 31/8/20 22:40, "ietf en nombre de Ole Jacobsen" <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx en nombre de olejacobsen=40me.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> escribió:
Khaled,
We’re not looking for “accurate count” or “votes,” we are looking for
a simple consensus on whether or not the IETF LLC should *explore* a
set of locations to determine whether or not they are suitable for an
IETF meeting. There are *many* factors that are taken into account
involving everything from Internet access, visa availability, cost and
time of (average) travel for attendees, venue expenses, safety and much more.
If you want to see what items are considers, look at the venue requirements
RFC and if you want to see how the community gets involved in these
discussions, look no further than the debate that erupted before our FIRST
meeting in Singapore.
Ole
> On 31 Aug 2020, at 12:56, Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Why we don't focus on something and work to achieve it?
>
> With fukk respect to Latin/South American cities, we were focused on three countries, Australia, New Zealand, and Egypt.
>
> It is good that you support two countries simultaneously but we still have to choose one location for the meeting, so accurate answers will be counted as it is like a voet.
>
> Maybe the IETF should think about a counting chart that shows the choices of all participants to get an accurate result about the majority and the consensus.
>
> Khaled Omar
>
>
Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher
The Internet Protocol Journal
Office: +1 415-550-9433
Cell: +1 415-370-4628
Web: protocoljournal.org
E-mail: olejacobsen@xxxxxx
E-mail: ole@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Skype: organdemo
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
