Re: [72attendees] Meeting arrangements and costs (was: Re: Clarifying Host Responsibilities )

Ole Jacobsen <> Mon, 11 August 2008 18:08 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from [] (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D22143A69A5; Mon, 11 Aug 2008 11:08:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0652E3A69CA for <>; Mon, 11 Aug 2008 11:08:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.449
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 08kqTkFwiz5E for <>; Mon, 11 Aug 2008 11:08:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B177D3A6878 for <>; Mon, 11 Aug 2008 11:08:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,189,1217808000"; d="scan'208";a="64090162"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 11 Aug 2008 18:07:23 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7BI7Mru015234; Mon, 11 Aug 2008 11:07:22 -0700
Received: from ( []) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7BI7Mc4028931; Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:07:22 GMT
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 11:07:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ole Jacobsen <>
To: Mary Barnes <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <p06240612c4ba114f84ca@[]> <6EBF07737F3818449841A452@p3.JCK.COM> <> <2659E0096D8BCA5C34A1E9F8@p3.JCK.COM> <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=3606; t=1218478042; x=1219342042; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;;; z=From:=20Ole=20Jacobsen=20<> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[72attendees]=20Meeting=20arrangements= 20and=20costs=20(was=3A=20Re=3A=20Clarifying=0A=20Host=20Res ponsibilities=20) |Sender:=20; bh=pi0Oj5Kvh3yZZmWtvXvhFoF3HtUdK3V0S6kvuRPw1ls=; b=K7OXtaAMyYlckCl8ScgBWF+EXArSvTz8ulInb8JLlCiS8mSU7wxXYgpaKB g7QVMSKCRrODAkBmoUeEedaII9BnzFktMGhROQKqOGSAWVaz4dBwbbP107rw k4kxJGJfWA;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4;; dkim=pass ( sig from verified; );
Subject: Re: [72attendees] Meeting arrangements and costs (was: Re: Clarifying Host Responsibilities )
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Ole Jacobsen <>
List-Id: "Discussion list for the attendees of IETF 72 meeting." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The Friday night problem appears to have been some kind of glitch 
possibly related to the IETF infrastructure going away and the 
hotel's "normal" mode not being properly reconfigured (I am guessing).

It was all working fine by Saturday morning.

In general, I think it would be difficult for the IAOC and AMS to 
provide in-room Internet access that is any "better" than what you 
would normally get at a given property. Generally speaking, the best 
we can negotiate is for the fee to be removed either before checkout
or by having access be just "open". In some cases, the NOC folks may 
be allowed access to the hotel network to provide better bandwidth
etc, but some hotels have very restrictive policies about this 
(notably the Starwood Group).

It would also help a great deal if IETF attendees treated the in-room 
network more like a "normal" visitor, i.e., used it only for e-mail,
Web browsing etc, and not some sort high-capacity multimedia system
with infinite capacity.

At CityWest we had a perfectly good "terminal room" and wireless 
access in all the meeting rooms and hotel lobby areas. We can 
certainly wish for more, but it's a matter of resources.


Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail:  URL:

On Mon, 11 Aug 2008, Mary Barnes wrote:

> I travel a lot and use hotels that often offer "free in-room Internet"
> and have never encountered the problems I did on Friday nite after the
> IETF meeting.  My expectation is that the price for "free Internet" is
> really built into the price of the room - i.e., there's nothing that's
> really "free".   However, we do have to consider the location, as I
> found that Internet is not nearly as widely available in much of
> Ireland, including in Dublin hotels.  I stayed in a supposed "business
> class" hotel in Dublin for two days prior to the meeting and had no
> Internet access except for the pay 10 euros per minute console in the
> lobby - those same sorts of consoles were the Internet source at the
> Cork airport, as well. 
> Regards,
> Mary. 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: []
> On Behalf Of Dale Worley
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 12:35 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [72attendees] Meeting arrangements and costs (was: Re:
> Clarifying Host Responsibilities )
> On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 07:55 -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
> > (ii) when the IAOC advertises free
> > Internet access in rooms, there is some limited IETF obligation to 
> > understand that "Internet access" implies connections that work, 
> > deliver addresses, route packets, etc., not just plug in and to 
> > provide an interface with the hotel about that...  or to say "well, 
> > there are Internet connections in the rooms, and they
> > are free, but maybe they won't work".   
> I've always taken "free in-room Internet" to mean "you get the hotel's
> in-room Internet service, for free" which implies "you may have a hard
> time getting it to work".  But perhaps that should be stated more
> clearly.
> Dale
> _______________________________________________
> 72attendees mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> 72attendees mailing list
72attendees mailing list