Re: [68ATTENDEES] Network shutdown time

Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu> Fri, 23 March 2007 10:34 UTC

Return-path: <68attendees-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HUh6h-0007YH-0U; Fri, 23 Mar 2007 06:34:51 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HUh6e-0007Y6-Sc for 68attendees@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2007 06:34:48 -0400
Received: from minbar.fac.cs.cmu.edu ([128.2.185.161]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HUh6a-0002Hf-S8 for 68attendees@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2007 06:34:48 -0400
Received: from minbar.fac.cs.cmu.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by minbar.fac.cs.cmu.edu id aa24684; 23 Mar 2007 6:34 EDT
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 06:33:58 -0400
From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu>
X-X-Sender: <jhutz@minbar.fac.cs.cmu.edu>
To: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@nokia.com>
Subject: Re: [68ATTENDEES] Network shutdown time
In-Reply-To: <E2D550D4-FD35-4A78-B252-AE909CFA5185@nokia.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33L.0703230630030.20808-100000@minbar.fac.cs.cmu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 97adf591118a232206bdb5a27b217034
Cc: 68attendees@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: 68attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for IETF 68 attendees." <68attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/68attendees>, <mailto:68attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/68attendees>
List-Post: <mailto:68attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:68attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/68attendees>, <mailto:68attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: 68attendees-bounces@ietf.org

On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Bob Hinden wrote:

>
> On Mar 23, 2007, at 11:13 AM, ext Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
> >
> >> It would be very useful to have one AP up until Friday afternoon.
> >
> > Let's avoid micromanaging the details, specifying number of AP's etc.
> > Instead, perhaps we can just ask that the meeting network remain
> > somehow accessible to attendees for a longer period.
>
> Keeping one AP up is easy, keeping the network up behind it is
> harder.

Absolutely true, especially with the sort of network the IETF has, which
is a complex enterprise-grade network with redundant networks, all put
together within a few days and torn down even faster.  However, there is a
certain extent to which portions of this network can be kept alive longer
than others.  In any event, the limiting factors would seem to be when the
network team plans to leave and...


> Normally, the network team has a fixed deadline to be out of
> the hotel space.

... which is the result of the agreement we've negotiated.  Moving the
deadline later is not impossible, though it may be more expensive than
it's worth.  It seems like this is an area in which the IAOC could do some
research.

-- Jeff


_______________________________________________
68ATTENDEES mailing list
68ATTENDEES@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/68attendees