At 6:46 AM -0700 7/17/06, Andy Bierman wrote:
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Nobody flies from LAX to San Diego because it ends up taking
twice as long as driving for 10 times as much, so don't expect
lots of flights from LA.
I fly between LAX and San Diego fairly often. There are two airlines
At 3:54 PM +0100 7/19/06, Dave Cridland wrote:
I seem to remember that at one point, Randall Gellens was actually
providing the entire room with unblemished, albeit slow, internet
access over his mobile.
It was much worse then that. I used the single outside phone jack to
get dial up
Hello;
On Aug 17, 2006, at 8:44 PM, Randall Gellens wrote:
At 6:46 AM -0700 7/17/06, Andy Bierman wrote:
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Nobody flies from LAX to San Diego because it ends up taking
twice as long as driving for 10 times as much, so don't expect
lots of flights from LA.
I fly
To: Joel Jaeggli
Cc: ietf@ietf.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
On 24-jul-2006, at 16:28, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
IETF should look for global sponsors, in a given time frame, for
example
for a year, or just a meeting if needed, but as said *decoupled*
from
Jul 2006 11:31:56 +0800
Para: John L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: ietf@ietf.org
Asunto: Re: Meetings in other regions
- Original Message -
From: John L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: YAO Jiankang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: Meetings
a: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:31:56 +0800
Para: John L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: ietf@ietf.org
Asunto: Re: Meetings in other regions
- Original Message -
From: John L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: YAO Jiankang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 10:34 AM
organizing them and their level of expertise in negotiating
T'sC's as well as their operating costs as the IETF.
Todd
-Original Message-
From: Joel Jaeggli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Jul 24, 2006 7:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
JORDI
PROTECTED]
CC: ietf@ietf.org
Asunto: Re: Meetings in other regions
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
That's part of the problem, sponsorship should be managed from a different
perspective, and totally decoupled from the venue itself.
IETF should look for global sponsors, in a given time frame
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
That's part of the problem, sponsorship should be managed from a different
perspective, and totally decoupled from the venue itself.
IETF should look for global sponsors, in a given time frame, for example
for a year, or just
Whoops, sorry. I meant the upcoming weekend when I wrote the message
(the weekend after the IEEE meeting).
On 7/22/06, Scott W Brim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 07/19/2006 20:08 PM, Clint Chaplin allegedly wrote:
Another data point; San Diego is hosting Comic-Con this weekend:
they're
On 07/19/2006 20:08 PM, Clint Chaplin allegedly wrote:
Another data point; San Diego is hosting Comic-Con this weekend:
they're expecting on the order of 100,000 attendees.
The weekend before the IETF? Hey, that's an advantage!
___
Ietf mailing list
Pasi.Eronen wrote:
...
For IETF67, I'm leaving home around 6AM, and arrive at LAX some 19
hours later (and fly from LAX to San Diego). After this kind of trip,
driving would be dangerous not just to myself, but everyone else on
the road as well...
There are better hub options than LAX...
Andrew G. Malis wrote:
Dave,
Actually, airline hubs increase the risk of depending on a single
airline, since most hubs (at least in the US) are dominated by a single
airline, such as Northwest in Minneapolis and Detroit, US Airways in
Philly and Pittsburgh, American in Dallas, Delta in
, it was fun driving to Montreal :-)
-Original Message-
From: Marshall Eubanks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 8:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
Hello;
On Jul 17, 2006, at 8:21 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Starting from Europe, San Diego seems to be no harder to reach
than any other major US city. The SPF route from Geneva
has two hops (e.g. via EWR or JFK).
I agree that major hub airports are a little easier to reach,
but maybe that's why we can get meeting space
Let me relate my *EXPERIENCE* with some interim meetings (lemonade). [I
suppose data is the closest we have to 'working code.'] Meeting held in
Dallas: 9 participants. Meeting held in Vancouver: 10 participants.
Meeting held in London: 14 participants. Meeting held in Beijing: 21
Clint Chaplin wrote:
One data point: IEEE 802 is in San Diego this week, and I've met at
least one attendee who flew through LAX to get here; that is, he took
LAX - SAN as his last leg.
the flight is so short, one can feel guilty taking it. however the effort to
rent a car from an airport,
Dave,
A few points:
If a non-hub venue offers dramatic net price savings, fabulous facilities, or
some other strong justification, it makes sense to go there.
Otherwise, a non-hum city forces virtually the entire set of attendees to:
1. Experience an extra flight, each way, with its
Dave,
Actually, airline hubs increase the risk of depending on a single airline, since most hubs (at least in the US) are dominated by a single airline, such as Northwest in Minneapolisand Detroit, US Airways in Philly and Pittsburgh, American in Dallas, Delta in Altanta and Salt Lake City,
On Wed Jul 19 14:53:59 2006, Dave Crocker wrote:
1. Since we know that The London metropolitan area has excellent
Internet
connectivity and bandwidth, the problems you experienced must have
been due to
the particular meeting site and not the region.
Indeed. The meeting site had confused Full
Dave Crocker wrote:
Clint Chaplin wrote:
One data point: IEEE 802 is in San Diego this week, and I've met at
least one attendee who flew through LAX to get here; that is, he took
LAX - SAN as his last leg.
the flight is so short, one can feel guilty taking it. however the effort to
I did this the last time we where in San Diego. The only thing to be
concerned about is at least United operated small planes with not to
good frequency (at least then) and tends to fill up on Saturday
afternoon and Sunday morning (I noticed).
Then going from International to domestic at
Eliot Lear wrote:
Minneapolis *is* a hub for Northwest.
4. More generally, secondary venues have less total airline seating capacity
and
the concentration of our 1200-1400 attendees flying in and out close together
usually has a noticeable impact on their flights.
This is unlikely to
On 19-jul-2006, at 15:45, Dave Crocker wrote:
I agree that major hub airports are a little easier to reach,
but maybe that's why we can get meeting space more easily
in non-hub cities?
If a non-hub venue offers dramatic net price savings, fabulous
facilities, or
some other strong
Dave Crocker wrote:
Clint Chaplin wrote:
One data point: IEEE 802 is in San Diego this week, and I've met at
least one attendee who flew through LAX to get here; that is, he took
LAX - SAN as his last leg.
the flight is so short, one can feel guilty taking it. however the effort to
rent a
On 7/19/06 1:47 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All in all, San Diego seems like a pretty bad choice for a meeting
place: it's even hard to get to from inside the US, and it's as far
as you can get from Europe without leaving the continental US.
I'm not crazy about it either,
The limitation on lack of eating and drinking places near the venue is
because of the choice of the particular hotel. IEEE is in the Hyatt
on the waterfront, and Old Town is well within walking distace, with
lots of restaurant choices.
On 7/19/06, Andy Bierman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave
Another data point; San Diego is hosting Comic-Con this weekend:
they're expecting on the order of 100,000 attendees.
On 7/19/06, Eliot Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave,
A few points:
If a non-hub venue offers dramatic net price savings, fabulous facilities, or
some other strong
third tier often
have considerably better connectivity than one would expect.
-Original Message-
From: Dave Crocker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 9:54 AM
To: Burger, Eric
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
Let me relate my *EXPERIENCE
On Monday, July 17, 2006 10:11:07 AM -0400 Jeffrey Altman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For me Paris and Montreal were the
two worst meetings I have experienced in ten years because of the
separation of the IETF hotel from the meeting locations and the in
ability to provide network access in the
On Saturday, July 15, 2006 05:24:45 AM -0400 Fred Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Thanks. gee whiz, that was a bunch of work for me. You had a tool? arg...
It's best to always ask Henrik and/or Bill if they have a tool.
Often they do, and if not, it may take less time to produce it than
On Monday, July 17, 2006 06:46:11 AM -0700 Andy Bierman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- I didn't find a terminal room, but instead a giant 'break room'
for ad-hoc meetings and food breaks. This was wonderful, and
about time! 802.11 has thankfully made the terminal room obsolete.
I
On Tuesday, July 18, 2006 12:03:34 AM +0100 Tim Chown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 11:38:15AM -0400, Stephen Campbell wrote:
Or skip the car. Fly into LAX, take one of several shuttles to Los
Angeles Union Station, and take Amtrak's Surfliner to San Diego.
These trains
Andy Bierman wrote:
Nobody flies from LAX to San Diego because it ends up taking
twice as long as driving for 10 times as much, so don't expect
lots of flights from LA.
For IETF67, I'm leaving home around 6AM, and arrive at LAX some 19
hours later (and fly from LAX to San Diego). After this
It's fun to chat but there are 2000+ people here so maybe the topic is
exhausted?
At least please change the Subject when you change the subject.
Brian
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
On Monday, July 17, 2006 10:11:07 AM -0400 Jeffrey Altman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For me Paris and Montreal were the
two worst meetings I have experienced in ten years because of the
separation of the IETF hotel from the meeting locations and the in
ability to provide network access
-Original Message-
From: Melinda Shore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 11:31 AM
To: Dave Cridland
Cc: IETF-Discussion
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
On 7/17/06 11:26 AM, Dave Cridland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think Melinda's intention
: Richard Shockey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Jul 18, 2006 11:45 AM
To: 'Melinda Shore' [EMAIL PROTECTED], 'Dave Cridland' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: 'IETF-Discussion' ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Meetings in other regions
-Original Message-
From: Melinda Shore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday
[ Disclaimer, I grew up in San Diego and now live in the LA area, so I have
biases in both directions. :) ]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(BTW, how much would a taxi from LAX to San Diego cost? And would
you expect taxis willing to do it?)
It's 120+ miles from LAX to the Sheraton San Diego, so a
From: Richard Shockey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The network access in the Delta was a problem. But the
Montreal Venue was excellent. Well worth the minor walk. The
city was marvelous. I'd easily vote to go back again. This
potential pattern of one meeting in Canada one in the US and
One data point: IEEE 802 is in San Diego this week, and I've met at
least one attendee who flew through LAX to get here; that is, he took
LAX - SAN as his last leg.
On 7/18/06, Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ Disclaimer, I grew up in San Diego and now live in the LA area, so I have
; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
--On Saturday, July 15, 2006 6:36 PM +0200 Brian E Carpenter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Patrick,
It may have got lost in this thread, but Fred has got the nub
of
the argument here: the IETF's goal is to do its work
Eric,
All I can say is that you're not looking very hard - I just spent all of5 mniutes searching for tickets and found a nonstop between Boston and San Diego for $418 on Alaska (this flight is also an American codeshare), and single-connection flights from Manchester NHstarting at $315 on
John C Klensin wrote:
It also means such things as:
* picking places within those countries or regions that have
good airports with easy (and multiple) international
connections. Even San Diego is a little marginal in that
regard. Based on experience in the last year or
Hello;
On Jul 17, 2006, at 8:21 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John C Klensin wrote:
It also means such things as:
* picking places within those countries or regions that have
good airports with easy (and multiple) international
connections. Even San Diego is
On Jul 17, 2006, at 8:45 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Hello;
On Jul 17, 2006, at 8:21 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John C Klensin wrote:
It also means such things as:
* picking places within those countries or regions that have
good airports with easy (and
Speaking as a working group chair, what is important to me is the
ability to make progress on the milestones the working group is
committed to achieve. Traveling to some far away location in order
to fill the seats with spectators does not result in work being
accomplished. I require that not
On 7/17/06 10:11 AM, Jeffrey Altman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Speaking as a working group chair, what is important to me is the
ability to make progress on the milestones the working group is
committed to achieve.
Sure, but you don't want to risk insularity, which I think
clearly has been at
At 10:11 AM -0400 7/17/06, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
My belief is that working group sessions should avoid presentations
whenever possible.
Visual material is something that is helpful but it need not be a
presentation. E.g., if we still had blackboards it would often times
be easier to
On 17-jul-2006, at 16:35, Melinda Shore wrote:
it seems reasonable to me to make
a decent, good-faith effort without getting overly bogged down
in where should we meet? discussions, and really try to get
the remote participation thing nailed down a little better. The
ratio of good to bad
On 7/17/06 10:51 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why do you need a jabber _scribe_ for input?
To allow remote participants to provide input.
Although I did jabber scribing for a couple of sessions the past week
I don't see all that much value in doing that: the audio feeds
...
Regards,
Jordi
De: Scott W Brim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organización: Cisco Systems, Inc.
Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 10:14:34 -0400
Para: Fred Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: ietf@ietf.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: Meetings in other regions
On 17-jul-2006, at 16:56, Melinda Shore wrote:
Why do you need a jabber _scribe_ for input?
To allow remote participants to provide input.
You can't type and run upto the microphone to relay comments at the
same time...
Although I did jabber scribing for a couple of sessions the past
On Mon Jul 17 16:10:49 2006, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 17-jul-2006, at 16:56, Melinda Shore wrote:
Although I did jabber scribing for a couple of sessions the past
week
I don't see all that much value in doing that: the audio feeds are
much more useful for following what's going on.
As
That said, and given the difficulties of balancing competing
priorities in site location, it seems reasonable to me to make
a decent, good-faith effort without getting overly bogged down
in where should we meet? discussions, and really try to get
the remote participation thing nailed down a
On 7/17/06 11:17 AM, Dave Cridland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon Jul 17 16:10:49 2006, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
Did I say it should become less important? I don't see how the
meetings are growing in significance, though.
I think Melinda's intention was to suggest that they ought to be.
On Mon Jul 17 16:21:49 2006, Melinda Shore wrote:
On 7/17/06 11:17 AM, Dave Cridland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon Jul 17 16:10:49 2006, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
Did I say it should become less important? I don't see how the
meetings are growing in significance, though.
I think
--On Monday, 17 July, 2006 15:21 +0300 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
* picking places within those countries or regions that
have good airports with easy (and multiple) international
connections. Even San Diego is a little marginal in that
regard. Based on experience in the
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Nobody flies from LAX to San Diego because it ends up taking
twice as long as driving for 10 times as much, so don't expect
lots of flights from LA.
For visitors, you might want to fly to LAX, rent a car,
drive down the 405, and take a detour to the Laguna Beach
area on
On 7/17/06 10:51 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why do you need a jabber _scribe_ for input?
The primary value of a jabber scribe is that someone knows that
*they* should type into the chat room. Absent that, yes, anyone
*could* type, but who reliably *would*?
Edward Lewis wrote:
I did listen to some of the sessions on the radio when I was caught in
my hotel room and unable to make it to the venue in time. While doing
so, I found myself wistfully thinking of remote participation of ICANN
meetings, where video is supplied. ;) In-time video has
On 7/17/06 10:51 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why do you need a jabber _scribe_ for input?
The primary value of a jabber scribe is that someone knows that *they*
should type into the chat room. Absent that, yes, anyone *could* type,
but who reliably *would*?
Having
Melinda Shore wrote:
On 7/17/06 10:51 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One thing that could help here is reduce the audio lag. It's quite
common to see something appear in jabber before you hear it on the
audio feed. A long delay makes reacting to the audio over jabber
Fred Baker wrote:
On 7/17/06 10:51 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why do you need a jabber _scribe_ for input?
The primary value of a jabber scribe is that someone knows that *they*
should type into the chat room. Absent that, yes, anyone *could* type,
but who reliably
On 07/17/2006 15:46 PM, Andy Bierman allegedly wrote:
- I didn't find a terminal room, but instead a giant 'break room'
for ad-hoc meetings and food breaks. This was wonderful, and
about time! 802.11 has thankfully made the terminal room obsolete.
I want this format every time.
Maybe we (or even I) should open a voting page where people could
enter their desired locations; or, conversely, the iAD could make it
part of the meeting survey.
Regards
Marshall
On Jul 17, 2006, at 1:28 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
When meeting in North America, I would strongly prefer
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 7:04 PM
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 11:38:15AM -0400, Stephen Campbell wrote:
Or skip the car. Fly into LAX, take one of several shuttles to Los
Angeles Union Station, and take Amtrak's
If it is that bad front of the house I don't trust their maintenance
crews.
No problem, they locked out the mechanics union and hired replacements
quite a while ago. While I think there is some chance that you would
show up for a Northwest flight and find that the airline had suddenly
gone out
- Original Message -
From: John Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 9:28 AM
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
If it is that bad front of the house I don't trust their maintenance
crews.
No problem, they locked out the mechanics union
Yes, the 405 can have traffic jams anywhere at any time, including
2:00 AM. Those
seem particularly unjust.
Regards
Marshall
On Jul 17, 2006, at 7:43 PM, Stephen Casner wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Depending on where you are coming from, and when you purchase your
- Original Message -
From: John L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: YAO Jiankang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
I do think there is considerable merit in identifying a set of venues
that are known to do a good
Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
For authors of active drafts, these are the numbers as of July 7,
2006, according to http://www.arkko.com/tools/stats/contdistr.html :
FWIW, the stats have been updated on the web now. As new
documents and new people come in, I usually have to add
some heuristics or
Asunto: Re: Meetings in other regions
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
There are two issues:
1) Cost. IETF has limited resources, so unless each of us want to pay more
and more for the registration fees or we are able to compensate the cost
with more sponsors (which is every day more difficult), we
be very obliging.
-Original Message-
From: Fred Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 11:04 AM
To: Scott W Brim
Cc: ietf@ietf.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
The IETF should indeed meet where our participants come from
on 2006-07-15 05:24 Fred Baker said the following:
Thanks. gee whiz, that was a bunch of work for me. You had a tool?
arg...
:-)
Well, in this case, I knew about a tool ;-) which was written by
Jari Arkko, not by me.
Best,
Henrik
On Jul 14, 2006, at 11:33 PM, Henrik Levkowetz
Can you normalize like this? 1523 drafts have authors from North
America, and so on. If a draft has three authors from North America
and two from Europe, is the draft counted five times or two times?
swb
On 07/15/2006 00:18 AM, Noel Chiappa allegedly wrote:
From: Henrik Levkowetz [EMAIL
Hello;
On Jul 14, 2006, at 10:17 PM, Henk Uijterwaal wrote:
At 16:01 13/07/2006, Sam Weiler wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, Henk Uijterwaal wrote:
I think it is quite simple: What matters to me is the total costs
of meeting rooms, breakfast, coffee and connectivity, or the
stuff covered by
Fred Baker said the following on 13/07/2006 13:38:
My point is that it is not about the price of the hotel, nor is it
about taking the Internet gospel to those who haven't been able to
participate in its development [...]
It's about having productive meetings in an atmosphere conducive to
That does not match the report I received from another attendee.
He commented on
2 days of travel to get there,
multiple 1 hour plus outages of external connectivity
and generally concluded that it would be a very bad choice of locale
for the IETF.
Personally, I find the view that we hold
Hi,
on 2006-07-15 10:43 Scott W Brim said the following:
Can you normalize like this? 1523 drafts have authors from North
America, and so on. If a draft has three authors from North America
and two from Europe, is the draft counted five times or two times?
No, you can't really normalize
Joel M. Halpern said the following on 15/07/2006 17:13:
That does not match the report I received from another attendee.
He commented on
2 days of travel to get there,
... but 2 hours from Europe ...
multiple 1 hour plus outages of external connectivity
I did not, once I switched
On 15-jul-2006, at 17:00, Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
In terms of image, I tend to think that it would indeed help the
IETF to
have meetings outside the Northern America and European regions.
It is
not so much about spreading the Internet gospel - others do it
better -
although it would
+1
At 17:00 15/07/2006, Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
In terms of image, I tend to think that it would indeed help the IETF to
have meetings outside the Northern America and European regions. It is
not so much about spreading the Internet gospel - others do it better -
although it would help. It
Add Singapore, Thailand, Australia, New Zealand, ...
Stephane
-Original Message-
From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 3:00 AM
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
Definitively there are several countries: Spain
Carpenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 9:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
Patrick,
It may have got lost in this thread, but Fred has got the nub of the argument
here: the IETF's goal is to do its work as efficiently
From: Patrick Vande Walle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In terms of image, I tend to think that it would indeed help
the IETF to have meetings outside the Northern America and
European regions. It is not so much about spreading the
Internet gospel - others do it better - although it would
Brian,
it may have got loast in this thread too, but Patrick has got the nub
of your argument there. The IETF goal is to efficiently do a work
which is as afficient as possible. RFC 3935 says that the IETF has to
influence the world. I say that it has to serve it, what also
means to educate
--On Saturday, July 15, 2006 6:36 PM +0200 Brian E Carpenter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Patrick,
It may have got lost in this thread, but Fred has got the nub
of
the argument here: the IETF's goal is to do its work as
efficiently
as possible, and that means assembling at locations that are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Another point to consider is reachability. While some folks don't mind
flying two days in each direction to get to some location or another, I
generally consider a good balance between time and cost to be more
important than pure monetary
On Jul 14, 2006, at 9:36 AM, Darryl ((Dassa)) Lynch wrote:
The closer the events are to my location, the more likely it
is I may make it.
To be honest, for those of us that don't have a business reason to
ignore distance as an issue (and companies will tend to trade off
number of
On 07/14/2006 10:01 AM, Fred Baker allegedly wrote:
Once upon a time,
the guideline I followed was that about 1/6 of the IETF was from Europe,
a smattering was from elsewhere, and the lion's share was from the US,
so I scheduled a meeting every other year in Europe, the odd one in
random
Scott W Brim wrote:
On 07/14/2006 10:01 AM, Fred Baker allegedly wrote:
Once upon a time,
the guideline I followed was that about 1/6 of the IETF was from Europe,
a smattering was from elsewhere, and the lion's share was from the US,
so I scheduled a meeting every other year in Europe, the odd
On 14-jul-2006, at 11:04, Fred Baker wrote:
It looked to me like this meeting was a tad less than half from
North America, perhaps 20% from Japan and China, and most of the
rest from Europe. That argues for roughly half of our meetings
being in North America, a meeting every other year in
Thanks for the clarification. I just wanted to be sure what those
statistics referred to.
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
US by itself was about half, and Canada was about another 10%. The
current split of 2/3 in North America and alternating Europe and Asia
once a year still seems to make sense from the stats.
Tony Hansen
Fred Baker wrote:
That said, I'll remind you of the demographics of this particular
from the norht american stats. I would encourage you to compare the
european and asiapac meetings, from the proceedings. My observation
is that the region/country the meeting happens in tends to be
exaggerated. Yokohama, for example, was 1977 folks, of which 1/4 were
US and perhaps 40%
.
Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 10:14:34 -0400
Para: Fred Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: ietf@ietf.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: Meetings in other regions
On 07/14/2006 10:01 AM, Fred Baker allegedly wrote:
Once upon a time,
the guideline I followed was that about 1/6
good point
Fred Baker wrote:
from the norht american stats. I would encourage you to compare the
european and asiapac meetings, from the proceedings. My observation is
that the region/country the meeting happens in tends to be exaggerated.
Yokohama, for example, was 1977 folks, of which 1/4
If the IETF is trying to promote the Internet (as ICANN does), then
holding meetings where participants aren't generally from is a step
in spreading the Internet.
If the IETF is meant to be a bare-bones, get engineering work done,
it ought to be in the most cost effective location. For what
Hi,
I think I am somewhat confused by this discussion.
In one place you say:
On 14 jul 2006, at 11.04, Fred Baker wrote:
The IETF should indeed meet where our participants come from. That
was my initial comment (from the mike) on are we from Latin
America, Africa, or Antarctica? I think
1 - 100 of 114 matches
Mail list logo
