Melinda, I see a difference between addressing requirements for protocol that address national regulatory services and voicing an opinion about national regulatory policies. I also noticed that the issues raised on the mailing list were wider than national regulatory services Roni Even > -----Original Message----- > From: Melinda Shore [mailto:melinda.shore@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 1:01 AM > To: Roni Even > Cc: 'Steve Crocker'; 'IETF Discussion'; 'IAOC IAOC' > Subject: Re: Request for community guidance on issue concerning a > future meeting of the IETF > > Roni Even wrote: > > I support this view. > > Furthermore I believe that even though people are allowed to have > their > > opinions about a specific country politics or values the IETF is not > the > > place to bring them forward regardless of the meeting location. The > IETF is > > a technical body and not the UN. > > Unfortunately (or maybe not) national regulatory policies > do have some influence on what the IETF does and one hopes > that what the IETF does has some influence on national > regulatory policies. I think the likelihood of there being > a problem seems low, but still, it's hard not to wonder about > something like the Raven process and how that particularly > boisterous meeting (Washington?) would have fared in China. > > Melinda _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf