Suresh has posted a revised version of this document based on the last call comments:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mtgvenue-meeting-policy-06 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mtgvenue-meeting-policy-06> In response to the last call comments, this version makes it clear that the policy being documented is aspirational, which seems to be the rough consensus view of the IETF community. The new text in Section 3 clarifies that the geographic location of a venue should be considered at the same level as Important Criteria specified in draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process. Please take a look at the changes. Thanks, Alissa > On Apr 5, 2018, at 4:12 PM, The IESG <[email protected]> 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 > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final > comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > [email protected] mailing lists by 2018-04-19. Exceptionally, comments may be > sent to [email protected] instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of > the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > Abstract > > > This document describes a proposed meeting location policy for the > IETF and the various stakeholders for realizing such a policy. > > > > > The file can be obtained via > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mtgvenue-meeting-policy/ > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mtgvenue-meeting-policy/ballot/ > > > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. > > > >
