Re: [102attendees] [103attendees] Visa problems - need a different invitation letter

Philip Prindeville <philipp@redfish-solutions.com> Tue, 04 September 2018 20:32 UTC

Return-Path: <philipp@redfish-solutions.com>
X-Original-To: 102attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 102attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCD6E130F8A; Tue, 4 Sep 2018 13:32:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B8wxA5I_xHZ0; Tue, 4 Sep 2018 13:32:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.redfish-solutions.com (mail.redfish-solutions.com [66.232.79.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BF2E130F02; Tue, 4 Sep 2018 13:32:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.198] (cpe-70-95-161-0.san.res.rr.com [70.95.161.0]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.redfish-solutions.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w84KWOsn003721 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 4 Sep 2018 14:32:24 -0600
From: Philip Prindeville <philipp@redfish-solutions.com>
Message-Id: <68380FA4-E91D-4AD0-95B0-5C64F6258ADF@redfish-solutions.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_8A5C1F86-CA73-4831-82FB-176B206CAEF4"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2018 13:32:21 -0700
In-Reply-To: <B4AF322B-DA08-4AC4-BFF3-7D19DDA80FB4@tzi.org>
Cc: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, 102attendees <102attendees@ietf.org>, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>, 103attendees@ietf.org, Niel Harper <harper@isoc.org>, Balazs Lengyel <balazs.lengyel@ericsson.com>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
References: <A8143A75C4D32848AB4E59FFC8B8FBA84BD19247@SINEML521-MBX.china.huawei.com> <alpine.OSX.2.01.1808291846180.5588@ole-pro-2.local> <163e477e-956b-c388-a062-115ad64629c2@gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.01.1808291954390.5588@ole-pro-2.local> <1762761125.28180.1535604751601@ichabod.co-bxl> <0DCD267A-8333-41D2-875B-F68051789BB8@gmail.com> <1725ef85-0763-85ca-7e31-bd251e4b4bac@ericsson.com> <20180904131753.wcqvts3d6nuyf56s@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <F5C76E02-3918-4525-9F5E-6EF95287D677@isoc.org> <C43F0F29-DB56-4723-976E-442177384EEC@nostrum.com> <AD352F893CC34984364088EE@PSB> <B4AF322B-DA08-4AC4-BFF3-7D19DDA80FB4@tzi.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 192.168.1.3
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/102attendees/jvaCb3yypQObrynsUBX5blf3cVE>
Subject: Re: [102attendees] [103attendees] Visa problems - need a different invitation letter
X-BeenThere: 102attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list of IETF 102 attendees that have opted in on this list <102attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/102attendees>, <mailto:102attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/102attendees/>
List-Post: <mailto:102attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:102attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/102attendees>, <mailto:102attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2018 20:32:38 -0000

That’s a bit of an apples to oranges comparison.

I think as North Americans (Canadians and Americans) and Western Europeans, we’re used to the rule of law and the equal application of it.

Not always the case in less developed countries.

I think that’s part of John’s point.


> On Sep 4, 2018, at 1:04 PM, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> 
> John,
> 
> While all this is true, it is also not very useful. The equivalent advice for US visitors would be that you can be shot every moment by a police officer that got a bit agitated. That is not useful advice. Useful advice would be how not to get into situations with those dangerous people. While some legal advice can be useful here, this is mostly about being street-smart. It is hard to be this without some experience, and this is why the only useful posts here have been on previous experience.
> 
> Sent from mobile
> 
> On 4. Sep 2018, at 19:07, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com <mailto:john-ietf@jck.com>> wrote:
> 
>> Hi.
>> 
>> If only to keep mailing list traffic down, can I encourage
>> everyone who is speculating on what type of visa is needed to
>> find the note that Andrew Sullivan posted on the subject a few
>> weeks ago and reread it carefully.
>> 
>> WIth a very small number of exceptions, the final decision about
>> what category of visa is, or is not, required belongs to the
>> authorities at the border when you try to enter the country.  If
>> you appear with a tourist visa or waiver and they ask questions
>> and conclude that category is inappropriate, you are either
>> headed home or in for a long conversation (and maybe an exercise
>> in filling out forms) while your status is sorted out.  If you
>> have a letter from you local consulate or a copy of their web
>> page indicating that your choice was consistent with their
>> guidance, the actual border authorities might accept that as
>> evidence that you should get in on that category of visa, might
>> accept it as evidence that whatever decision you made was made
>> in good faith, or might ignore it entirely.
>> 
>> Again, Andrew's summary and comments are much better than mine.
>> But my point is that these decision belong to border authorities
>> in the country you are trying to enter and we really cannot
>> accomplish very much (other that causing noise on the lists) by
>> crowdsourcing opinions about what is needed or appropriate.
>> This is one area in which IETF Consensus, even if it existed,
>> would be of little value.
>> 
>> best,
>>    john
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 102attendees mailing list
>> 102attendees@ietf.org <mailto:102attendees@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/102attendees <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/102attendees>
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> 102attendees mailing list
> 102attendees@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/102attendees