The "ideal" venue (if there is such a thing) would enable both: - good participation from WG primary contributors AND - lots of local participation The second factor is important, imho, because a fraction of local newbies are going to be impressed by their IETF experience, and will want to participate again in the future. The may well become primary contributors themselves down the road. Regards, Ed Juskevicius edj@xxxxxxxxxx -----Original Message----- From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dave Crocker Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 2:09 PM To: Brian E Carpenter Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria Brian, > Unfortunately, that won't help us broaden IETF participation to bring > in people from countries that currently don't have many participants. > On the contrary, it will tend to freeze our participation profile > where it is today. On a long term basis, that would not be good for > the IETF, IMHO. Worrying about expanding the diversity of participation in IETF meetings made quite a lot of sense when the IETF was initially expanding, along with global adoption of the Internet's technology. It is far less clear why that is a significant factor in current venue choices. Productivity of working groups would seem to be far, far more important. An implication of this is that a venue which gets lots of local participation, but which winds up getting LESS participation among the primary contributors to working groups, would be a poor choice. Statistics about attendance seem to focus on total numbers, rather than participation by primary contributors. d/ _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf