>>>>> "Jaap" == Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Jaap> I'm amazed about what non-issues are raised everytime the
Jaap> IETF is not meeting in the USA.
I think there is some bias on both sides. The US folks would love to
show that either the rest of the world is as bad as the US or there
are problems having IETF meetings elsewhere so we should have them in
the US so it is nice and cheap for the US attendies. Similarly the
rest of the world would like to show that we should have the meetings
closer to them. This creates a lot of FUD on both sides.
Also, most of us are engineers. We'd like to know that what we are
doing is absolutely legal. We don't want to know that if some customs
agent really wants to make our life difficult they could and it would
be hard for us. "Your trip will be safe unless you manage to make
someone at the airport hate you," is not as reassuring as "our
algorithm has been proved correct."
Some of the people ar actually concerned about the issues they bring
up. Some people, are just interested in confirming there is no
problem.
Let's try and reduce the pro-US and anti-US FUD. In particular let's
try and stick to facts and accept that it is the practical reality
that matters, not the worst possible thing that could happen if a
country decided to enforce its most draconian laws.
Whenever people spread FUD on either side it makes me discount their
statements. That's bad. It means that if there is a real problem it
will take longer to recognize it. Useful facts would be information
about people who have had trouble getting to an IETF meeting. This is
probably not the right list and this is certainly not the right
thread, but someone should be collecting that information so we can
act on it and make *informed* judgements about where to hold our
meetings.
Meanwhile I'll mock every country's laws and try to do so equally;
they all seem deserving.
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf