On Aug 23, 2011, at 10:24 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
>
>
> --On Tuesday, August 23, 2011 07:57 -0400 Thomas Nadeau
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> I obviously don't have all of the information available to me
>>> that you and the IAOC do, but it seems to be there is always
>>> another alternative. If there are no local ones, that
>>> alternative is usually described as "just say no and go
>>> elsewhere". What I'm trying to understand, mostly for the
>>> future and with the understanding that it is presumably much
>>> too late for Taipei and the several following meetings, is
>>> whether you would ever consider that an option for a meeting
>>> for which you have a sponsor if you hold it in a particular
>>> place or if you and the IAOC really believe there is no
>>> alternative under those circumstances.
>>
>> I think we need to adopt a simple rule of thumb whereby we do
>> not book venues where room rates of less than $200 USD are
>> unavailable - sponsor or otherwise.
>
> Tom, I'm usually not the one to leap to the defense of the IAOC
> on meeting costs, but I think we need to be very careful about
> such rules. For many of us, total cost of meeting -- total
> hotel room costs (which may be different from quoted rate), air
> fares and other transport, days away from home, meals,
> registration fee (for this meeting, I notice what I think is is
> a new incentive to register at the last minute prior to the
> "early" cutoff), even the cost of beer for those who depend on
> it to lubricate conversations -- is far more important than the
> hotel bill alone. In many cities, rooms quoted at USD 200 (or
> much less) are easy to find, but one can make up for it in taxi
> charges or Internet access surcharges. Others may have
> different constraints -- I've worked with companies for whom
> transport to a meeting comes out of different accounts than
> being there and therefore counts either more or less. And hotel
> (and other on-site) costs can fluctuate considerably as exchange
> rates change.
>
> Of course, the difficulty of calculating total meeting costs is
> that each of us has different habits, comes from different
> locations, has different travel perferences, etc. IAOC claims
> that they try to approximate that number and consider it. I
> think they often get it wrong but acknowledge that it is
> probably impossible to get it right.
I agree that the overall cost of each meeting is what really counts.
HOWEVER, most of us work at companies which have rules for
limits on specific charges (i.e.: hotel room rates). Having room rates
(fees/taxes/etc...) that exceed about $200 usually gets people in
trouble with their travel departments, not to mention the overall cost
of the meeting. I think this was discussed at the last Plenary where
typical meeting venues in Asia were having very significantly higher
costs associated with meeting venues/hotels.
> So I'm opposed to a USD 200 (or any other number) firm limit on
> hotel rates. At the same time, I continue to wish that the IAOC
> would be more open with the community about how these decisions
> are made and, in particular, how the tradeoffs between
> sponsorship (and hence lower costs to the IETF for meeting
> infrastructure and arrangements) and meetings costs to attendees
> are made... open enough that the community could give
> substantive guidance on the subject, guidance that I assume the
> IAOC would follow if it were coherent and plausible.
I am not advocating for any hard limit. I said "about $200". I think
most people would agree that $210 or even $230 would be acceptable,
whereas $300 is getting a bit silly.
> Being a little cynical, I do wonder if we would see a difference
> in meeting selection patterns if all IASA staff and IAOC members
> were required to stay in hotel or other rooms costing no more
> than, say, your USD 200 per night figure (including transport,
> if necessary, to and from the meeting site). It might help to
> calibrate the pain level. The idea is not realistic for a
> number of reasons, but might make an interesting
> thought-experiment.
Indeed. Budget is budget.
--Tom
>
> john
>
>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
