Re: [68ATTENDEES] Returning to Prague (was: Re: Hilton Prague)

Fred Baker <> Sun, 25 March 2007 05:39 UTC

Return-path: <>
Received: from [] ( by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HVLSO-0005Vm-4l; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 01:39:56 -0400
Received: from [] ( by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HVLSM-0005Vb-UN for; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 01:39:54 -0400
Received: from ([]) by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HVLSJ-0004z4-IE for; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 01:39:54 -0400
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 24 Mar 2007 22:39:51 -0700
Received: from ( []) by (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l2P5dokJ015158; Sat, 24 Mar 2007 22:39:50 -0700
Received: from ( []) by (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l2P5doA8023492; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 05:39:50 GMT
Received: from ([]) by with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 24 Mar 2007 22:39:50 -0700
Received: from [] ([]) by with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 24 Mar 2007 22:39:49 -0700
In-Reply-To: <4BF1E72894B84DD9198E34A9@[]>
References: <> <4BF1E72894B84DD9198E34A9@[]>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Fred Baker <>
Subject: Re: [68ATTENDEES] Returning to Prague (was: Re: Hilton Prague)
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 07:39:47 +0200
To: John C Klensin <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Mar 2007 05:39:49.0894 (UTC) FILETIME=[014C2A60:01C76EA0]
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2694; t=1174801190; x=1175665190; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim7002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;;; z=From:=20Fred=20Baker=20<> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[68ATTENDEES]=20Returning=20to=20Prague=20(was=3A=20R e=3A=20Hilton=20Prague) |Sender:=20; bh=MvFiIh8uo0zJHwnm/mps1p5anaeIg52gbAQwkl9lM54=; b=ORhqkytWgxq/mymNgvgozZCbW1RBl+VrPNECRBd7ntR/tq7PXoVfOpFReegQa5ICaskJbgz1 6qjyrLib76z6JETqsDCozauWRmFOe2hjLzhXLm1BlwFEGE7ku/OClOBy;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-7;; dkim=pass (si g from verified; );
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0ddefe323dd869ab027dbfff7eff0465
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for IETF 68 attendees." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>

On Mar 25, 2007, at 6:24 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
> And, as part of that, I expect the IASA to give the community  
> feedback about what guidance it thinks it is getting and what  
> general criteria it is going to consider so that we can check for  
> synchronization and mutual understanding.   I hope you agree.

Speaking as a member of the IASA... who stepped into the role with a view to community service and  
whose opening comment from the floor was a many-minute diatribe on  
cookies that resulted in a later comment at the mike from an ARIN  
representative to the IESG that she was looking for hope regarding  
the matters at issue in the Internet and this community was too  
wrapped up in its kindergarden-class problems to give her much...

I have already been to a distinguished member of the community  
looking to resurrect an ID that I happen to know he was working on  
relating to such guidance perhaps a decade ago. It contained advice  
such as

  - has to be a city within rational travel from a major world air hub

Of course "rational" varies depending on country; a direct plane  
flight using A320/737-class aircraft from Frankfurt, LAX, or Sydney  
would be accepted, as would Yokohama, which is amply served by trains  
and busses from Tokyo Narita. Fargo North Dakota probably would not  
(a word to those who have not seen the movie "Fargo" - you should -  
and we would be a shock to that community).

The ID is nowhere to be found, but I suspect that the set of  
recommendations can be recreated. I think that is the superior approach.

I have to tell you that the discussion on this list has been  
interesting to say the least, and the amount of grousing about things  
that are true everywhere I go (and BTW which are better in Prague  
than they are in many places we have IETF meetings) has been  
disappointing to me personally. You, John, have tried hard to be  
reasonable in the statement of your concerns, but even you have been  
a little biased in the direction of complaining about things that are  
better managed here than they are in a lot of places I travel to.  
Good grief; in Santa Barbara, my home town, a non-smoking section  
often shares the air space with a smoking section. I have issues with  
smoke as well. I deal with that by choosing where I spend my money.

A historian reviewing the thread might conclude that we got dragged  
to the back side of nowhere and ate in Greasy Spoon restaurants. We  
didn't, guys. Get some perspective.

I observe that for every person with a complaint there have been two  
saying they loved it. I'm listening to those people as well.

68ATTENDEES mailing list