: IETF Disgust
Subject: Re: Time in the Air
--! WARNING ! --
This message originates from outside our organisation,
either from an external partner or from the internet.
Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link
On 31 May 2013 20:56, Carlos M. Martinez carlosm3...@gmail.com wrote:
You are right, Wellington is almost 7 degrees south of Montevideo,
although I hope it's better served by airlines :D
also nearer the equator than most of Europe; a geographical fact of life
that has been conveniently
Lloyd Wood
quiet time on a plane can be productive time.
Economy class or something better?
--
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great
[abdussalambar...@gmail.com]
Sent: 01 June 2013 11:18
To: Mark Nottingham
Cc: ietf Discussion
Subject: Re: Time in the Air
Thanks Mark,
This is very interesting results, it is ok if not 100% correct which I
think the error can be less than 10%, but I may have different
analysis of results. You concluded
On Jun 2, 2013, at 10:38 AM, l.w...@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
Always Europe gets better results because it is the favoriate
meeting-location for ALL
businesses
{{citation needed}}
Here you go:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edsel_Citation
(idea taken from http://what-if.xkcd.com/47/ - is this a
regional-meeting-participants.
My analysis discovers that there is not close air-time-results when
comparing between homes/regions, the results variances between home
cities are large.
Overall, I suggest to consider the number of participants that are
full time attendance in all most meetings 90
In an attempt to inject some data into the discussion, I wrote a bit of code
that figures out how much time, given your home city, you would have spent in
the air if you'd attended all IETF meetings since IETF74 (i.e., from 2009
onwards).
The first column is the home airport.
The second
On 05/31/2013 11:59 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
In an attempt to inject some data into the discussion, I wrote a bit
of code that figures out how much time, given your home city, you
would have spent in the air if you'd attended all IETF meetings since
IETF74 (i.e., from 2009 onwards).
The
On 31/05/2013, at 8:28 PM, Fernando Gont fg...@si6networks.com wrote:
On 05/31/2013 11:59 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
In an attempt to inject some data into the discussion, I wrote a bit
of code that figures out how much time, given your home city, you
would have spent in the air if you'd
Wow, that's real science at work...
Sorting by the relevant column (I don't own a private jet):
LHR 249:44 // London
FRA 255:22 // Frankfurt
SFO 282:04 // San Francisco
FCO 283:04 // Rome
SVO 287:14 // Moscow
ATL 297:28 // Atlanta
BOS 297:38 // Boston
NRT 314:38 // Tokyo
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Carsten Bormann c...@tzi.org wrote:
Of course, this doesn't include time-to-airport, so you can immediately
discount London.
Well, you say that, but I now know why Alexey moved from Moscow to Kingston
(40 minutes to LHR on the X26).
Dave.
clearly, all IETF meetings should be in Cape Town, Wellington, or Perth,
because more time in the air means more time without interruption where drafts
can be read before the meeting.
quiet time on a plane can be productive time.
Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:03 PM, l.w...@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
clearly, all IETF meetings should be in Cape Town, Wellington, or Perth,
because more time in the air means more time without interruption where
drafts can be read before the meeting.
quiet time on a plane can be productive time
are cute :-)
This would also eliminate the July IETF, since it's too cold to travel to
Antarctica then. So the savings in air travel time would no doubt be
substantial.
On May 31, 2013, at 10:03 AM, l.w...@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
clearly, all IETF meetings should be in Cape Town, Wellington, or Perth,
because more time in the air means more time without interruption where
drafts can be read before the meeting.
quiet time on a plane can be productive time
If people are interested, we could launch a new service: dirigible tours
with Internet access. We'll have multiple airships, one for each set of
related meeting rooms. Of course we'll have audio, jabber and all the
virtualization tools we have today. We'll amble along at some moderate
speed,
Completely off-topic too, but since I live in the southernmost capital
city of the world, and certainly not the best served by airlines
When you moved to NZ ? ;-)
-J
...@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
clearly, all IETF meetings should be in Cape Town, Wellington, or Perth,
because more time in the air means more time without interruption where
drafts can be read before the meeting.
quiet time on a plane can be productive time.
Until more airlines start offering in-flight
On 5/31/2013 8:12 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
We'll have multiple airships, one for each set of related meeting rooms.
is dirigible a new term of endearment for an AD?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
On Friday, May 31, 2013, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 5/31/2013 8:12 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
We'll have multiple airships, one for each set of related meeting rooms.
is dirigible a new term of endearment for an AD?
Obviously the ADs have a small helicopter so they can get between
dirigibles.
On 5/31/13 12:18 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
On Friday, May 31, 2013, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 5/31/2013 8:12 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
We'll have multiple airships, one for each set of related
meeting rooms.
is dirigible a new term of endearment for an AD?
Obviously the ADs
You are right, Wellington is almost 7 degrees south of Montevideo,
although I hope it's better served by airlines :D
cheers!
~C.
On 5/31/13 3:24 PM, Jorge Amodio wrote:
Completely off-topic too, but since I live in the southernmost capital
city of the world, and certainly not the best
On 31/05/13 20:18, Scott Brim wrote:
On Friday, May 31, 2013, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 5/31/2013 8:12 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
We'll have multiple airships, one for each set of related
meeting rooms.
is dirigible a new term of endearment for an AD?
Obviously the ADs
On 31/05/2013, at 7:59 PM, Mark Nottingham m...@mnot.net wrote:
SFO 204:10 282:04 // San Francisco
BOS 197:42 297:38 // Boston
ATL 205:44 297:28 // Atlanta
ANC 197:12 345:54 // Anchorage
LHR 198:02 249:44 // London
FRA 202:10 255:22 // Frankfurt
FCO 223:52 283:04 //
... and now, looking forward to our announced upcoming meeting locations (just
the shortest route numbers, not great circle):
LHR 145:30 // London
JFK 150:20 // New York
SFO 155:54 // San Francisco
FRA 156:08 // Frankfurt
ATL 158:10 // Atlanta
BOS 159:34 // Boston
ANC 181:56 //
On May 31, 2013, at 7:03 AM, l.w...@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
clearly, all IETF meetings should be in Cape Town, Wellington, or Perth,
because more time in the air means more time without interruption where
drafts can be read before the meeting.
Heavens no. All meetings should be in Santa
Heavens no. All meetings should be in Santa Barbara, so I don't have
to board an airplane at all.
i too, but tokyo. induce. answer, remote participation. i hope that a
decade from now many of us will not need to fly.
randy
On May 31, 2013, at 4:32 PM, Elwyn Davies
elw...@dial.pipex.commailto:elw...@dial.pipex.com wrote:
Don't they use the ADs (Area Drones) controlled from the IESG bunker?
Nope, ADs are autonomous.
On May 31, 2013, at 8:49 PM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote:
i too, but tokyo. induce. answer, remote participation. i hope that a
decade from now many of us will not need to fly.
We could just always meet in Tokyo. I'd be down with that...
:)
29 matches
Mail list logo
