On Aug 17, 2015, at 12:14 PM, Adam Roach <adam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 8/16/15 14:08, John C Klensin wrote: > > I'll note that there are different things that people seem to have raised concerns about here, although the one that I've found most relevant in the past remains unmentioned. For the most part, we replace the Internet backhaul on the official hotel with our overprovisioned pipe that has been arranged for the meeting [1]. This typically leads to a three-tier internet access setup: > > • Conference hotel: flawless or nearly flawless Internet connection > • Overflow hotel(s): the Internet is completely unusable > • Nearby hotels: the Internet connection is kind of a craps shoot, depending on the number of participants who end up there, and the capacity of the Internet link the hotel has > /a This is always high on my list of reasons to try to stay at the conference hotel, also. But note that this time, the conference is not at the InterContinental “Headquarter Hotel", it is at the attached conference center. Can anyone speak to whether the InterContinental's infrastructure is going to see the upgrade from the IETF infrastructure usually offered to the conference hotel? If the big pipe goes to the conference center only, then the InterContinental ’s infrastructure may suffer from the same problems the Maastricht’s did for similar reasons. —Sandy
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail