My understanding is that even not considering Austria, the connectivity has been much better in the last meetings (not counting this and the W DC one). I also agree that 1 year is much better than just one week, but one week on-site, plus several months up-front for planning, PLUS SEVERAL IETFs having being organized here, seems to me a failure this time. The suggestion about writing down the experience has been raised already in previous occasions in this list, and not sure if this has been done. I still believe there is an interesting coincidence in the usage of the same equipment in the last two meetings (this and W DC). What measures had been taken since the last meeting, once was clearly recognized that that equipment had some problems ? Regards, Jordi > De: "Lucy E. Lynch" <llynch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Responder a: <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> > Fecha: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:18:00 -0800 (PST) > Para: Tim Chown <tjc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > CC: "ietf@xxxxxxxx" <ietf@xxxxxxxx> > Asunto: Re: IETF62 Network and Terminal Room Information > > On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Tim Chown wrote: > > <snip> >> I recall Austria had probably the best network seen in some time (even >> Randy Bush praised it in the plenary ;) but the magic secret was lost in >> the mists of time. > > Not exactly, Telekom Austria spent more than a year ramping up for the > meeting AND they had installed and controled all of the in building > network for the Austria Center Vienna. They did a great job, but they > had way more access and way more time in building than most IETF network > teams ever get. The difference between a production network and Rock & > Roll. > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf