Re: China venue survey

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

 




On Sep 22, 2009, at 10:14 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

Disruptive as defined by whom? It seems to me that the contract we might sign cedes the definition of disruptive to a government about whose laws
we know very little. Do correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know
the IETF has never before signed a contract that lets the government of
the host country define what is and is not an allowable topic for
discussion.


No, it cedes the definition to a hotel who might know less about the local law than we do. It's not the "big boss" that's likely to take offense at IETF; it's the piranha a little lower on the food chain who thinks he has something to prove that is dangerous, or the even-lower ranked person who is just afraid of what the superiors might think and therefore over-reacts.

I'd be much less worried if the Ministry of State Security were running the whole show directly and overtly, including providing escorts for every bar-bof and going-to-dinner group, like they did in the bad old days.

Although the undertone I'm getting from people who have talked to the organizers seems to hint that MOSS is already actively engaged in the IETF event planning, which is probably a good thing as it means a lot fewer headaches.

Perhaps we could get the contract amended so that we'd have a designated government office or official making the pull-the-plug decision instead of of hotel bell-hops, house security, bar managers, housekeepers, or whatever? To my mind, that would lower the perception of financial risk we're taking on.

--
Dean
_______________________________________________

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]