Re: [72attendees] Clarifying Host Responsibilities (was Re: Guestroom Network not under NOC Control)

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <> Thu, 31 July 2008 23:17 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from [] (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 830113A69F7; Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:17:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 710183A69F7 for <>; Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:17:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.253
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.253 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-3.980, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_HOST_ALMOST_IP=1.889, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_EQ_STATIC=1.172, HOST_EQ_STATICIP=1.511, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jnciqYTylGPB for <>; Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:17:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D774F3A67A5 for <>; Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) by ( (Cipher TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.5.R) with ESMTP id md50000216572.msg for <>; Fri, 01 Aug 2008 01:17:05 +0200
DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nowsp;; s=MDaemon; t=1217549636; x=1218154436;; q=dns; h=DomainKey-Signature:Received:User-Agent:Date:Subject:From:To: Message-ID:Thread-Topic:Thread-Index:In-Reply-To:Mime-version: Content-type:Content-transfer-encoding:Reply-To; b=EboHLnZA+oMnRW SJoeWjjOSglj32W3dGKlkqBFsDbZrO1vh2ehu3BCxx+6HQoRIaxGZHlP1ZiyktbR UzyMYGxwLmraCNRwA+ucDuY4VwriC4DaIYbpcy7VIpJuMk9m+smz5mzjM7/YK9Yz PgAdQ72K7hA/8qB5UvsN7rESwYeYA=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=MDaemon;; c=simple; q=dns; h=from:message-id; b=pOa5PCG0/u0Tt1Vrvhr8rVBfWBkOBY2yHbAomEnFC5XJKyi6Mpjw9rUtL0l/ZjAkIDNFzvbMU+78gXXLbxYE5GvzHDh+1kGWyLXc6I0/7CxKuwOB6/icD5C5G1dwO1ei9PLLXPiFPWBx4EEKyk3xD0kpsJy++Zkr46Q07pWnxSQ=;
Received: from [] by (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.5.R) with ESMTP id md50002989584.msg for <>; Thu, 31 Jul 2008 18:17:59 +0200
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:18:49 +0100
To: "" <>
Message-ID: <>
Thread-Topic: [72attendees] Clarifying Host Responsibilities (was Re: Guestroom Network not under NOC Control)
Thread-Index: AcjzKR0/AA6Jc3XZQkKBM72rGmTz5g==
In-Reply-To: <>
Mime-version: 1.0
X-Spam-Processed:, Fri, 01 Aug 2008 01:13:55 +0200
X-MDAV-Processed:, Fri, 01 Aug 2008 01:13:56 +0200
X-Spam-Processed:, Fri, 01 Aug 2008 01:17:05 +0200 (not processed: message from valid local sender)
X-MDAV-Processed:, Fri, 01 Aug 2008 01:17:12 +0200
Subject: Re: [72attendees] Clarifying Host Responsibilities (was Re: Guestroom Network not under NOC Control)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
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="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I didn't suggested that Madrid was bidding against Dublin.


> From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <>
> Reply-To: <>
> Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 12:34:09 +0200
> To: Jordi Palet Martínez <>
> Cc: <>
> Subject: Re: [72attendees] Clarifying Host Responsibilities (was Re: Guestroom
> Network not under NOC Control)
> Jordi,
> On 29 jul 2008, at 12.01, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
>> And when you find volunteer hosts which find the money, the venue
>> and so on,
>> such as myself in Madrid, trying for several years, then you
>> disqualify the
>> venue because is not in down-town ... A very fair comparison with
>> this one
>> or even San Diego.
>> Madrid venue was much better (even being the first hotel in the
>> world that
>> offered IPv6 in the guest rooms several years ago, no filtered
>> ports/protocols at all !), much better located, much cheaper, better
>> commuting to downtown (cheaper and shorter), better food, more
>> restaurant
>> choices in the venue and around, etc.
>> So the first that make the possible hosts and sponsors to step down
>> is the
>> organization itself with ridiculous decisions which are then taken as
>> irrelevant for other venues (and Dublin is a very good example).
>> Now I'm not sure wanting to spend anymore my cycles in retrying this
>> again
>> unless there is a firm commitment. I bothered the government to much
>> to
>> raise +150.000 Euros for sponsoring this and I'm not even sure they
>> will
>> consider it again.
> At least as long as I was on the IAOC (during BTW when this proposal
> was evaluated) we every now and then (but not always) have several
> venues to select from and then does a site evaluation and weighs the
> pros and cons. That is then discussed with the localhosts and
> eventually a venue is selected. The IAOC never provides public
> comments or names the venues not selected or the reasons for it. When
> there are multiple choices there will always be venues not selected,
> of the venues that have not been selected the only one that keep
> coming back up here is that you bring up your failed bid for Madrid.
> But what I really wanted to comment on is that the above sounds like
> MAdrid was considered as an alternative to Dublin. AFAIK it never was.
> Best regards,
> - kurtis -

The IPv6 Portal:

Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.

72attendees mailing list