On Aug 23, 2011, at 10:24 AM, John C Klensin wrote: > > > --On Tuesday, August 23, 2011 07:57 -0400 Thomas Nadeau > <tnadeau@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> I obviously don't have all of the information available to me >>> that you and the IAOC do, but it seems to be there is always >>> another alternative. If there are no local ones, that >>> alternative is usually described as "just say no and go >>> elsewhere". What I'm trying to understand, mostly for the >>> future and with the understanding that it is presumably much >>> too late for Taipei and the several following meetings, is >>> whether you would ever consider that an option for a meeting >>> for which you have a sponsor if you hold it in a particular >>> place or if you and the IAOC really believe there is no >>> alternative under those circumstances. >> >> I think we need to adopt a simple rule of thumb whereby we do >> not book venues where room rates of less than $200 USD are >> unavailable - sponsor or otherwise. > > Tom, I'm usually not the one to leap to the defense of the IAOC > on meeting costs, but I think we need to be very careful about > such rules. For many of us, total cost of meeting -- total > hotel room costs (which may be different from quoted rate), air > fares and other transport, days away from home, meals, > registration fee (for this meeting, I notice what I think is is > a new incentive to register at the last minute prior to the > "early" cutoff), even the cost of beer for those who depend on > it to lubricate conversations -- is far more important than the > hotel bill alone. In many cities, rooms quoted at USD 200 (or > much less) are easy to find, but one can make up for it in taxi > charges or Internet access surcharges. Others may have > different constraints -- I've worked with companies for whom > transport to a meeting comes out of different accounts than > being there and therefore counts either more or less. And hotel > (and other on-site) costs can fluctuate considerably as exchange > rates change. > > Of course, the difficulty of calculating total meeting costs is > that each of us has different habits, comes from different > locations, has different travel perferences, etc. IAOC claims > that they try to approximate that number and consider it. I > think they often get it wrong but acknowledge that it is > probably impossible to get it right. I agree that the overall cost of each meeting is what really counts. HOWEVER, most of us work at companies which have rules for limits on specific charges (i.e.: hotel room rates). Having room rates (fees/taxes/etc...) that exceed about $200 usually gets people in trouble with their travel departments, not to mention the overall cost of the meeting. I think this was discussed at the last Plenary where typical meeting venues in Asia were having very significantly higher costs associated with meeting venues/hotels. > So I'm opposed to a USD 200 (or any other number) firm limit on > hotel rates. At the same time, I continue to wish that the IAOC > would be more open with the community about how these decisions > are made and, in particular, how the tradeoffs between > sponsorship (and hence lower costs to the IETF for meeting > infrastructure and arrangements) and meetings costs to attendees > are made... open enough that the community could give > substantive guidance on the subject, guidance that I assume the > IAOC would follow if it were coherent and plausible. I am not advocating for any hard limit. I said "about $200". I think most people would agree that $210 or even $230 would be acceptable, whereas $300 is getting a bit silly. > Being a little cynical, I do wonder if we would see a difference > in meeting selection patterns if all IASA staff and IAOC members > were required to stay in hotel or other rooms costing no more > than, say, your USD 200 per night figure (including transport, > if necessary, to and from the meeting site). It might help to > calibrate the pain level. The idea is not realistic for a > number of reasons, but might make an interesting > thought-experiment. Indeed. Budget is budget. --Tom > > john > > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf