Re: IETF 78 Annoucement

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





--On Sunday, May 24, 2009 11:42 AM -0700 Dave CROCKER <dhc2@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

   but often concluded that it is less important than other
   concerns


As long as the host gets to choose the venue, other concerns
will remain secondary, including incremental travel time and
cost.

This was the key point that was, once again, explored the last
time we had a plenary discussion about venue.

Yes, exactly.

Let me see if I can ask the question in a slightly more productive way.

Ray and IAOC:

I assume that, in each of these out-of-the-way cases, you have asked potential hosts to pick locations that meet other criteria, such as the airport one, and that they have said "no, we won't sponsor except in our chosen location". Could you confirm that?

I also assume that you have attempted to launch a "sponsor IETF meetings" program on a "contribute to a fund" basis, as distinct from "host this particular meeting", and either gotten no useful response or discovered that host in-kind contributions in specific locations dominate possible cash contributions. Can you confirm that as well?

Finally, I assume that the IAOC has done an analysis, not only of what it would cost us to abandon hosted meetings entirely, but of what it would cost --both in absolute and meeting-fee terms-- to say "no" to hosts who insisted on out of the way locations. May we see that analysis not later than the plenary in Stockholm?

    john

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]