Well, that's part of the problem in answering the survey ... Doing half a question is not a good question ! If you ask me, you want to got to Vancouver or Quebec, but you don't inform about the possible venues, it is USELESS, because I may have preferences depending on the venue itself (for example fitness facilities). If you ask me, about China, but don't provide the venue (same question as per Vancouver/Quebec) and the city (flight cost/combination) may me to take a different decision. Regarding the question of the China specific issue, I've been there for several meetings, and never got a problem. But despite my preference, and my willingness to go to China, I believe is unfair, to complain about the US issues if everybody will need to get a visa for China. So in the case we opt for that option, definitively the average cost for each attendee should be lower enough to compensate for the extra cost of obtaining the visa (so let's say, the hotel cost 20% lower than in US), AND we need some warrantee that the visas will not be denied ... (I'm assuming that China doesn't deny visas, but someone may have a different view). BUT PLEASE, next time you start a thread like this, a survey or whatever, provide ALL the information, and not just bits of info. Otherwise, please, avoid the noise and extra time slices from everybody. Regards, Jordi > From: Ole Jacobsen <ole@xxxxxxxxx> > Reply-To: Ole Jacobsen <ole@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:47:47 -0700 (PDT) > To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: "ietf@xxxxxxxx" <ietf@xxxxxxxx>, Yaron Sheffer <yaronf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: China venue survey > > Cullen, > > Well, nobody has officially announced that the proposed venue is > Beijing, although a lot of people seem to have assumed so and yet > more people copied the assumption. The announcent of the venue > is expected soon, within say 30 days. > > But to the core of your question: The rotation would normally put us > in Asia, so you can think of Vancouver as a backup plan. We're not > really asking you if you prefer Vancouver over X city in China (at > least not in this survey). > > Ole > > Ole J. Jacobsen > Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal > Cisco Systems > Tel: +1 408-527-8972 Mobile: +1 415-370-4628 > E-mail: ole@xxxxxxxxx URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj > > > On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, Cullen Jennings wrote: > >> >> Given that the the current Location for IETF 79 is listed as Canada/China, >> the >> correct questions to ask is would people prefer IETF 79 be in Vancouver of >> Beijing. > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ********************************************** The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 ! http://www.ipv6day.org This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf