Hello Michael,
Can you tell the community if the LLC has any plans/thoughts to stop looking
for new places to meet, rather to just establish a list of 10-15 cities where
we have successfully met, and simply repeat?
I think this not a good idea.
Based on my experience (I spent significant energy to bring IETF to
Prague) the event brings local attention to the Internet and people are
more likely want to participate. And (I believe) new city (and Prague is
relativelly new city) can host succesfull meeting.
Many have suggested this as a better policy, but it seems that it's just
discussion.
Christian Huitema made a good case already for the Asia list being not just
Bangkok/Singapore, but also including Tokyo/Yokohama and Seoul.
That's four for Asia.
One could easily add: North America: Vancouver, San Francisco, Montreal, Philadelphia.
Europe: Prague, Berlin, London, (Paris?)
I expect some voices for Minneapolis and some other saying "no" for any
US venue. I also saw some objections to Singapore in the list in the past.
The other problem is that experience in cities can change over time (due
of objective or subjective reasons). And we need a process get cities in
and out the list.
I'm sure that many of the cities on your list are potentially interesting,
but why bother make the effort?
Yes, we should have "*" in the rotation 1-1-1-*, but we should do it
intentionally as reach out.
I don't see Austin (or Ottawa, or Malta) as being reach-out, as nice as they
might be.
For me it seems like the point is - can we find local volunteers on top
of "offical host" who can put an extra effort to make the organization
smooth. Looks to me like bridging the gap in between ietf meeting
participant expectations and local culture is a key for success.
Michal
