On Oct 2, 2009, at 12:27 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
...
Perhaps the latter suggests a way for the IAOC to think about
this. Assume that, however unlikely it is, the meeting were
called off mid-way and that every IETF participant who attended
sued the IASA to recover the costs of leaving China
On Fri, October 2, 2009 3:55 pm, Noel Chiappa wrote:
It's not clear that (self-)censorship is going to be the worst problem
from
an IETF in the PRC. One of the things I would be most concerned about is
the
PRC government using this meeting for propoganda purposes (either
internal,
or
Dave,
Thanks for your clarification, now I understand this has converged to
a more contract language issue.
At this stage, I may not be able to help on the detail languages since
I guess the hoster or IAOC already
have been deeply involved in it.
Anyhow, I apprecaite that you make everybody more
From: Hui Deng denghu...@gmail.com
Lastly, I think that everybody have to self-censor about what he does.
It's not clear that (self-)censorship is going to be the worst problem from
an IETF in the PRC. One of the things I would be most concerned about is the
PRC government using this
--On Friday, October 02, 2009 11:55 -0400 Noel Chiappa
j...@mercury.lcs.mit.edu wrote:
It's not clear that (self-)censorship is going to be the worst
problem from an IETF in the PRC. One of the things I would be
most concerned about is the PRC government using this meeting
for propoganda
Hui,
Hui Deng wrote:
1) I personally have attended several standardization meetings such as
3GPP and 3GPP2 in China,
Many of us have attended meetings in China and we have found them productive and
enjoyable. However all of those other groups conduct their business in a way
that is
Dave,
Are you suggesting the IETF is not mature enough to meet in China?
After watching this thread for a while, I am beginning to be convinced.
Steve
On Oct 1, 2009, at 12:04 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
Hui,
Hui Deng wrote:
1) I personally have attended several standardization meetings
Steve Crocker wrote:
Are you suggesting the IETF is not mature enough to meet in China?
After watching this thread for a while, I am beginning to be convinced.
Wow. No. In fact, it completely misses what I said.
Given how thoroughly I parsed the problems with the contract language, this
Steve Crocker said:
Are you suggesting the IETF is not mature enough to meet in China?
After watching this thread for a while, I am beginning to be convinced.
The IETF as an organization is mature enough to meet anywhere.
However, IETF participation is open, so that attempting to predict
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Bernard Aboba wrote:
Steve Crocker said:
Are you suggesting the IETF is not mature enough to meet in China?
After watching this thread for a while, I am beginning to be convinced.
The IETF as an organization is mature enough to meet anywhere.
However, IETF participation
Some folk say that we should ignore the language in the draft contract,
because it will not be enforced, except under extreme circumstances. First,
it is never appropriate for people signing a contract to assume that it
won't be enforced, especially when they cannot really know the exact
Hi,
Four remarks:
This is true, however there is another path that could be taken. Let the host
sign the contract. Then, engage with the PRC government, explain the situation
to them, and ask them to help avoid an embarrassing situation by providing
assurances in writing, to the IETF, the
excuse me for previous sending wrong email.
Hello, all
I have to say something before the deadline of this survey.
To be honest, I am not the hoster, but live in Beijing, China
for the long time, and would like to clarify several
different concerns about China and Beijing.
1)
Hui Deng's statement (below) is the most important I have read on the issue
of a meeting in China.
Re-read the Tao. The IETF is about building, developing, contributing to an
Internet available to all. It is people, not governments. If you,
personally, are afraid of China, I recommend you go
14 matches
Mail list logo
