Re: IETF hotel selection mode and a proposal (was" Re: Hilton BA is Booked already?)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



At 2:27 PM -0500 12/17/15, John C Klensin wrote:

 I think it would be entirely reasonable for
 the IESG to say to the community "we need to be on-site
 because... and believe that IETF efficiency would suffer if we
 weren't".  Personally, I'd probably support that position.

...

 FWIW, 28% of only 400+ rooms feels like a rather big number.
 Had Ray said "5%", it wouldn't have occurred to ma to propose
 that particular exercise.


I'd like to point out the obvious, which is that there are two parts to the hold-back number. Expanding the IETF room block from 400 to, say, 800 or 900, would be a way to shrink the percent and cut way back on the "how can the hotel be sold out within an hour of the announcement" complaints.

--
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
The Briggs/Chase Law of Program Development:

To determine how long it will take to write and debug a
program, take your best estimate, multiply that by two, add
one, and convert to the next higher units.




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]