Ray,
To be sure I understand your note, I draw the following
conclusions and wonder if they are correct:
(1) The total number of rooms you expect to have contracted/
reserved, assuming that no more open up at the Intercontinental,
is 830 on the peak nights.
(2) Noting Ole's observation about Japanese hotels and the
implication that this may not be as much of an issue as it was
in, e.g., Maastricht, you, the IAOC, and the Secretariat are
going to guarantee high-quality (IETF-grade, fat pipe) Internet
access only for the Intercontinental and one, so far
unspecified, "overflow hotel". Assuming, for lack of any other
data, that each of the 4 contracted overflow hotels will make
the same number of rooms available, that means that circa 433
people will get that level of service, at least as far as any
IETF arrangements are concerned.
Is that correct, or at least roughly so?
If it is, would it be appropriate to suggest that, in the
interest of experiencing what the "ordinary" IETT participant
experiences, that no member of the IAOC, no one being paid (via
contract or otherwise) by the IETF, no member of the IESG or
IAB, and, in the interest of helping them evaluate how important
the issues are, no member of the Nomcom end up in any of those
433 or so rooms? Just a thought...
john
--On Monday, 17 August, 2015 16:57 -0400 Ray Pelletier
<rpelletier@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> All;
>
> Here is where things stand.
>
> 1. "Headquarters Hotel"
>
> Our Host, WIDE, is attempting to obtain more guest rooms in the
> InterContinental Yokohama Grand.
>
> The InterContinental Yokohama Grand has 475 standard rooms, but
> would only allow us to book 300 rooms on the peak nights of
> Monday and Tuesday. They said they had to accommodate their
> existing corporate and airline contracts.
>
> Wednesday and Thursdays were contracted for fewer rooms, 289
> and 250. We contracted for the rooms using the usual Bell
> Curve, which typically reflects that some folks depart on
> Wednesday and more on Thursday. This was a mistake on our
> part. if those rooms had been available we should have
> contracted for the max we could get.
>
> 2. Overflow Hotels
>
> We are working with the Japanese Travel Bureau to open the JTB
> reservation system for the 4 contracted Overflow Hotels.
> Together these hotels have 530 rooms on a peak night, for a
> total of 3,550 room nights.
>
> One of the 4 will also have the IETF network, courtesy of
> WIDE. \
>
> The JTB current system only permits reservations from 31
> October to 7 November, not before or after. We are trying to
> get that fixed. We think that reservations may be open
> Tuesday, but might be Wednesday.
>
> Our preference would have been to open the Overflow Hotels
> together with the Headquarters Hotel. We did not to provide
> those needing Visas more time to process their applications.
>
> 3. Alternative Hotels
>
> There are a number of alternative hotels near the Pacifico
> Yokohama (Meeting Venue). The IETF does not have a contract
> with these hotels, nor is the IETF network available. This
> information is provided as a convenience to meeting attendees.
> The IETF makes no representation as to availability, prices,
> cancellation practices, or Internet quality.
>
> Map of possible alternative hotels:
> https://www.google.com/maps/search/hotels+near+InterContinent
> al+
> Yokohama+Grand,+Yokohama,+Kanagawa+Prefecture,+Japan/%4035.
> 4604397,139.6350251,14z?hl=en
>
> You may use your favorite search engines such as:
> http://www.hotels.com/
> http://www.trivago.com/
> https://www.airbnb.com/
>
> You should expect to see an update Tuesday.
>
> Ray
>
>
>
>
>
>> On Aug 17, 2015, at 1:39 PM, manning <bmanning@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps a data point / leverage.
>>
>> The week -AFTER- the IETF, was the Yokohama International
>> Quilt week. Same venue, same hotel. It's been scheduled
>> for over a year now. Many groups/tours are SOLD OUT, in
>> planning to attend this event, plus side trips the week
>> before and after. This event is larger than the IETF.
>>
>> …and it was recently canceled by the organizer…
>>
>> Perhaps (maybe) a number of the reserved rooms are tied to
>> that event and they have not cleaned up after the effects of
>> the cancelation.
>>
>>
>> manning
>> bmanning@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> PO Box 6151
>> Playa del Rey, CA 90296
>> 310.322.8102
>>
>>
>>
>> On 17August2015Monday, at 10:18, Adam Roach
>> <adam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/17/15 11:48, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
>>>> Speaking from personal experience, I have always found
>>>> Internet access in Japanese hotels to be quite excellent
>>>> even without these upgrades by our NOC team.
>>>
>>> I suspect that the historically destroyed Internet
>>> connections in many of the overflow hotels -- and the
>>> Maastrict hotel for that matter -- are perfectly adequate
>>> for a normal mix of guests. I find it difficult to believe
>>> that you could accurately judge what a hotel's performance
>>> would be without a load similar to what IETF attendees
>>> typically bring with them.
>>>
>>> To be clear, issues rise above those of simple bandwidth
>>> saturation. Most commonly, I've seen things that I suspect
>>> are DHCP pool exhaustion (with results ranging from issuing
>>> duplicate addresses (!) to simply being unable to get an
>>> address) and NAT port exhaustion (leading to the inability
>>> to make or maintain connections). We bring a unique set of
>>> stresses to an infrastructure that are way outside the
>>> normal envelope.
>>>
>>> /a
>>>
>>
>