On 20 Sep 2009 17:07:06 -0000 John Levine <johnl@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>I think it should be considered that if such restrictions are acceptable >>for on venue, once the precedent is set, it may well be requested again. > >Quite possibly, and I expect that should it happen, we'll debate the >merits again. > >No venue is perfect, and any large country is going to have political >issues. People from several countries cannot get US visas, simply >because of where they live, not anything they've done, but we seem >willing to meet in the US anyway. China is a large and sophisticated >country, nothing we do is going to change that, and politically >motivated boycotts far larger than anything the IETF could do have >invariably been ineffective and often counterproductive. Whatever >small influence we might exert is going to be far greater if we meet >and interact with the people who run the Chinese Internet. > I didn't for a moment consider that an IETF decision not to go would have any impact on the policies of the Chinese government. I agree with you that it would not. The question that was posed, as I understand it, was about the acceptability of the restrictions to the IETF. If such restrictions are acceptable, then they should be acceptable anywhere. I don't think China should get a free pass because it's China. Scott K _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf