There is a new I-D trying to fix what we require for the meetings .... Is still preliminary and I will like to have an informal meeting with the interested people which may have some expertise on this topic in Paris. So if you're interested let me know ! http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection -criteria-00.txt My experience setting up meetings and conferences shows that most of the time, unless you don't fix the venue ahead 18 months or even more, the chances to have a good venue and price are reduced very quickly (I mean less choices, worst price and conditions in general). So, I will say that is extremely important to plan as much ahead as possible, and if it can be done even 2 years up-front, much better than just 18 months. Is not only a question of who is attending, but also who is organizing and hosting. Regards, Jordi > De: Dave Crocker <dhc2@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Organización: Brandenburg InternetWorking > Responder a: <dcrocker@xxxxxxxx> > Fecha: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 07:09:16 -0700 > Para: John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> > CC: <iad@xxxxxxxx>, "ietf@xxxxxxxx" <ietf@xxxxxxxx> > Asunto: Re: Meeting Locations > > > >> Is it reasonable for us to hope that, as things settle down over >> time, we can reasonably expect to get to the "meeting times and >> locations known 18 months to two years out" status that has been >> the target for some years? Or, to put it differently, without >> any unreasonable expectations about how quickly it is possible >> to get back onto that basis, is it still the target and do you >> consider that target plausible? > > "back" onto that basis? > > As a matter of practise, there has never been any attempt to schedule venues > 18-24 months out. Instead, there has been a reliance on finding meeting > hosts. This has ensured that early venue selection was not possible. > > (Some folks might remember that roughly 10 years ago, Marshall and I proposed > scheme that would have chosen a standard site if no host is selected by the > cutoff.) > > As noted in the current thread, early site selection permits attendee > budgeting. From the IETF side, it permits serious negotiating for site terms > and operational efficiencies when a previous site is re-used. Minneapolis has > been a useful demonstration of this latter point, I think. > > By placing a priority on having hosts and/or on selecting venues to encourage > local Internet development, we place meeting operational and cost benefits as > secondary priorities. > > -- > > d/ > > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > +1.408.246.8253 > dcrocker a t ... > WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ************************************ The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org Barcelona 2005 Global IPv6 Summit Information available at: http://www.ipv6-es.com This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf