Re: Assessment criteria for decision on in-person/virtual IETF 108

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

 



On 4/17/20 4:47 PM, John C Klensin wrote:

So, following up on this a little bit and from the perspective
of a member of a couple of high-risk populations, if the venue
and locale are assessed as safe, but my getting there requires
sitting on an airplane within a couple of meters of one or more
people who are not clearly virus-free (not just, e.g., able to
pass a walk-through temperature screening) [1] then (i) I'm
putting my life at risk by going and (ii) as Ron sort of
suggests, holding the meeting f2f puts me (and those in similar
positions and those who, even while being at lower risk of
serious problems given infection, are not in a position to risk
infection [2], creates not only a disadvantage but would
constitute discriminatory behavior.

Even worse, a f2f meeting is long enough in duration that people who caught the virus while traveling to the meeting, can transmit it to others while there.

Keith






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

  Powered by Linux