On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Geoff Mulligan <geoff.i...@mulligan.com> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> You could pick Rosemont, IL (next to O'hare) for every meeting (oops,
> sorry - misses on decent food).

Minneapolis or Chicago, one place doesn't make it. The policy of the
IETF has been to meet where the attendees come from, although with
some projection into the future. So I thought we were currently trying
to equalize meetings in North America, Europe, and Asia. So it is an
absolute minimum of three places.

Donald

>        geoff
>
> On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 13:23 -0700, Dave CROCKER wrote:
> >
> > On 8/24/2011 1:18 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > > As long as a relatively large percentage of IETF folks see meetings as
> > > an opportunity to sight-see, I don't think we'll see much support for
> > > rotating among a small set of major hub locations.
> >
> > +1
> >
> > But it's worse than "relatively large percent".  There's absolutely no 
> > minority
> > constituency that is vocal about wanting this to change.  That's why I 
> > declared
> > myself giving up on this topic.
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to