In my opinion, the *location* of IETF meetings is not important for
the technological openness of the standards, but it *is* important
for its *symbolism*.
Many people seem to hold similar views about the social, political or
emotional potential of IETF venue choice.
In the 1990s, when the Internet was developing as a global
infrastructure, such roles for the IETF made sense, because the IETF
meeting helped to promote the Internet. Indeed, local Internet
infrastructure often was significantly improved in order to accommodate
the arrival of an IETF.
In my opinion, today, such factors are distractions from the primary
purpose of the IETF meeting venue, which is getting IETF work
accomplished.
Work is accomplished by being maximally accessible to the widest range
of /active/ IETF participants. Accessibility is affected by effort,
cost and local resources. This means easy travel to the venue, a good
choice of convenient, personal accommodation at different price points,
a good meeting venue layout, and good choices for nearby eating. (The
list is simplified, of course; I'm choosing the ones I think most
important.)
Extra travel effort and time, extra travel cost and/or inconvenient
venue logistics serve as barriers to participation. They make an IETF
meeting less inclusive.
Meetings venues are placed around the world in order to distribute the
pain of travel for actual participants, not to promote the IETF or the
Internet. Since so many participants are well-funded by their companies
and do quite a bit of travel every year, many of us are less sensitive
to these issues as barrier. In that regard, we lack empathy and for
those with less funding or less experience.
Some people believe that the presence of an IETF meeting serves as a
kind of recruitment marketing to a region, for IETF participation.
Beyond the single-meeting boost in 'local' attendance, I believe we have
no data confirming any on-going increase in participation by people from
that region. After 20 years, we ought to have hard data.
Further, going to an area that typically has a tiny (and relatively
stable) percentage of IETF meeting participants mostly serves to make
meeting attendance more painful for /everyone/, rather than only a portion.
It is difficult enough to find high quality meeting sites. Adding
social, political or emotional concerns makes it /more/ difficult.
d/
ps. I'm speaking for myself only, of course. And I've held the above
views since Marshall Rose and I first suggested a significantly
simplified meeting venue process in the 1990s. My time on the IAOC has
only strengthened my view.
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net