I'd like to add one additional comment as an IAOC member (but not speaking for the IAOC). I think we, the IAOC and meetings committee, can and should do better on transparency of meeting requirements, selection process, and contracts. I'm hoping to see some progress on this before/by BA. Lou On 01/08/2016 10:39 AM, Leslie Daigle wrote: > > The other question that has been on my mind is whether or how we > continue to meet as a community. In my personal opinion, one of the > most important things about the IETF *is* the community and having the > opportunity to engage one on one. I go to IETF meetings for hallway > conversations as much as anything else. But — in the span of the next > 10 years, it’s not clear to me if we can or should find non-meeting ways > to achieve those effects, and get our work done. > > Absent discussion within and direction from the community on where it > thinks we’re headed on that front, I (as an IAOC member) was not > comfortable with agreeing to hotel commitments 8+ years out. It is my > understanding that we, in fact, have the ability to cancel the contract > for IETF 111 with a survivable penalty a few years out. I.e., it’s a > good deal for current course and speed, and if that changes > significantly before we get to the 3 year window, we have the ability to > reorganize. > > I realize that doesn’t address all of the issues you raised, but > hopefully it helps at the broad-brushstroke level. > > Leslie. > >