Ole Jacobsen wrote: > Dave, > > Not wishing to speak for Ray, let me give some general observations: > > 1. IETF meetings require BOTH a suitable venue (meeting rooms) AND a > host organization. Sorry, but it has been demonstrated that a host is not required. It has further been demonstrated that the host (or, rather, the sponsor) does not have to be co-resident with venue. > 2. The host organization have a large say in location (city) > selection, for a number of reasons. We are going to Philadelphia > because that is where the HQ of our host is located, for example. This has been the classic model, yes, but recently has been considerably loosened. > 3. While "isolated" venues may be "problematic", there is always a > tradeoff between a suitable venue (again meeting rooms) and its > distance to nearby hotels and other facilities. In the case of > Dublin, it is anticipated that most attendees will stay in the > main hotel. Having only been party to some of the discussions > around this particular venue I can only say that CityWest was > considered to be by far the best alternative --- in Dublin. Hence the question about priorities. Start with declaring Dublin the venue and it well might be true that this is the best venue. Start with a requirement that the venue have ample resources within walking distance and Dublin well might be disqualitied. It's all about priorities. And no, I would not have queried if I hadn't felt that attendee convenience were not the priority that should be highest, but that it appears not to have been for the Dublin event. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf