> On 12 Jan 2018, at 17:06, Jim Reid <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 12 Jan 2018, at 16:43, Denesh Bhabuta <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Whilst I agree that we should be encouraging this, it is easier said than >> done to have the hotel companies apply this. >> >> ... explanation of meeting planner's hotel hassles snipped ... >> >> It is frustrating, but we are where we are. All we can do is try and >> encourage them to change… but in my experience over the last few years, that >> is not enough. I am unsure what else can be done. > > I wonder if it's worth talking to the IETF meeting organisers? IIUC they use > a third party reservation service. {I forget its name.] On-line bookings > "just work" with the meeting and overflow hotels. IETF meetings are larger > and more frequent than RIPE meetings. So maybe that makes a difference.
I think you might mean passkey.com <http://passkey.com/> - but IETF, nor NANOG use them all the time. It is city dependant and also relies on a number of hotels in the city to be loaded up in to the system, to be of any use… plus it requires some organisation to subscribe to passkey - seeing as they do not mention what the subscription rates are, I expect this to be extremely expensive. UKNOF used passkey when it had a meeting in Belfast, but that was because we were dealing with Belfast City’s marketing department and they have the contract with Passkey.com <http://passkey.com/> and the relationship with all the hotels in the city. We have not had any other opportunities to use it elsewhere because no other organisations we have dealt with have has a passkey subscription. NANOG, coming up in in Atlanta are offering the Loews hotel via passkey… the last meeting in San Juan was directly online with the hotel. IETF 101 in London.. the two Hiltons are being offered via direct Hilton Guest List manager links (as I mentioned in my previous email, Hilton are very good at this), whilst the Novotel requires people to ring up and quote a code and book via phone. Regards Denesh
