Dear IESG, On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 01:12:40PM -0700, The IESG wrote: > > The IESG has received a request from the Meeting Venue WG (mtgvenue) to > consider the following document: - 'High level guidance for the meeting > policy of the IETF' > <draft-ietf-mtgvenue-meeting-policy-04.txt> as Best Current Practice In a recent discussion, the IAOC came to realise that the documents draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process and draft-ietf-mtgvenue-meeting-policy may be in some tension. One of them requires the IASA to balance meeting venues over time, and the other has requirements that a meeting must meet. One possible difficulty that arises from the combination is if one region turns out to be vastly more expensive than others. In that case, some criteria for each venue may not be met in one region. The result might also be financially ruinous for the IETF in general. The current IAOC interprets the drafts such that any of the criteria except those in section 3.1 of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process may be traded against any other, over several years if need be, in order to meet the geographic distribution policy described in draft-ietf-mtgvenue-meeting-policy. Assuming the documents are published as they are currently written, we will use that interpretation as governing IASA implementation decisions. It is worth noting that, among the criteria that could be traded are those of affordability. If that is not the interpretation of the IETF community, then some clarification is needed to the text. Best regards, Andrew Sullivan for the IAOC -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
