Elwyn Davies wrote:
There is some logic in this.. Participants need to be able to get from airport to hotel to venue on foot/public transport without needing to bring excessive personal protection gear that they might not otherwise own, or experiencing heat stroke because they aren't used to the temperature/humidity (oh, and touristing before/after isn't much fun either).
Lets just not specify anything here. Its not like the secretariat would be blindly executing our rules and ending up selecting the Antarctica for the next IETF location. (They wouldn't because the hotel capacity is insufficient.) In other places, you can probably manage short exposure to the elements, particularly if you happen to check beforehand which part of the world you are going to. And yes, this might mean investment to protective gear such as a hat, jacket or a tube of SPF 40. Or a taxi ride. And I've found that touristing is more interesting in extreme conditions.
More importantly, the venue must be able to maintain a sensible temperature/humidity in the conference rooms (20-23 deg C, 50% Relative Humidity).
This is more important. I feel that the rooms are mostly too cold (probably tuned for business suits, not t-shirts).
Other health risks: Would participants need vaccinations before attending? Is it in a malaria risk area? Are there other infectious disease hazards or nuisances - e.g., West Nile fever, Lyme disease, Scottish Highland midges. Even if visas are not required are there any health checks at immigration?
Its really better that people check with their own doctors about this. I at least check before "weird" trips from our local clinique what the vaccination recommendations are.
The criteria say nothing about accessibility for the differently able.
This should be a requirement.
Editorial note: You should flag up that continental European conventions are in use for numbers.
What numbers? --Jari _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf