On 11/14/12 4:23 PM, Arturo Servin wrote: > Agree. But also people (and perhaps organisations, that also are > serious participants) in Latin America, Africa, and some parts of Asia > has less income than their counterparts in North America. Some of the > people from those places do serious efforts to attend the IETF. I have very, very little doubt that operators in less wealthy countries are running into problems that are unfamiliar to most IETF participants, and that need some attention from protocol weenies. But, that said, work in the IETF is focused on progressing documents and that requires continuity on the part of participants. If someone can only attend when a meeting is geographically close, that suggests that they'll attend one meeting every <bignum> years. If they feel that remote participation is sufficient, that's available now. So, I'm not sure that what you're arguing addresses the reason there's an IETF in the first place, and IETF working method, in the second. I think that's probably the reason you're running into pushback, even from people who think that the meetings should move around more. Melinda