Joe Abley wrote:
On 20-Jan-2006, at 11:55, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
Well said Barry!
From: Barry Leiba
My biggest concern is in sections "2.3. Freedom of Participation"
and "2.5. Attendance Limitation and Visas", in that I'm not sure
how realistic they are. Without getting overly into politics (let's
please not), I think they reflect a somewhat naïve view of some of
the political realities. Specifically...
Meetings should not be held in countries where some
attendees could
be disallowed entry or where freedom of speech is not
guaranteed for
all participants.
Indeed. Applied with vigour, this restriction implies that no country
is suitable to meet in. That leaves us with parts of Antarctica, a
floating venue located in international waters, or zero-g bar BOFs in
outer space. I favour the latter.
A slightly more realistic approach might be to hold meetings regularly
in different countries with (ideally) divergent security/ immigration
policies, in the hope that successive meetings might at least exclude
different sets of people.
This is a very important issue as we consider visiting countries we've never
visited before and as visa regulations change in countries we have been
to often. It would be very useful to know how more people feel we should
tune these criteria.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf