Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
Yi Zhao <yzhaous@huawei.com> Tue, 18 November 2008 20:05 UTC
Return-Path: <73attendees-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: 73attendees-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-73attendees-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3F0B28C23A;
Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:05:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: 73attendees@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 73attendees@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCFE828C23C;
Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:05:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id A8-H8Y7XkRkF; Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:05:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usaga01-in.huawei.com (usaga01-in.huawei.com [206.16.17.211])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70B9A28C236;
Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:05:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (usaga01-in [172.18.4.6])
by usaga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14
(built Aug
8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0KAJ00C4FP4LI8@usaga01-in.huawei.com>; Tue,
18 Nov 2008 12:05:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Z73500b ([130.129.95.80])
by usaga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14
(built Aug
8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0KAJ00E2JP4IFZ@usaga01-in.huawei.com>; Tue,
18 Nov 2008 12:05:09 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:04:56 -0600
From: Yi Zhao <yzhaous@huawei.com>
In-reply-to: <678210550811181156y64097694n83b061be9cbcc6b9@mail.gmail.com>
To: 'David Quigley' <quigleystravels@gmail.com>,
'Nicholas Weaver' <nweaver@icsi.berkeley.edu>
Message-id: <004a01c949b8$eda20c00$505f8182@china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
Thread-index: AclJt9BXG2T4F6xxTeeYUYfGYz1czgAANYvw
References: <427021276.00739@cnnic.cn>
<3525C9833C09ED418C6FD6CD9514668C051E2DD5@emailwf1.jnpr.net>
<20081118105949.108966jc49wwndyt@webmail.nist.gov>
<4922EFDD.6090900@psg.com> <20081118165343.GA8992@cisco.com>
<F9EC68B6-AB00-4502-A48F-2695559EFBB2@icsi.berkeley.edu>
<678210550811181156y64097694n83b061be9cbcc6b9@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: 73attendees@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified
for2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
X-BeenThere: 73attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for the attendees of IETF 73 meeting."
<73attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/73attendees>,
<mailto:73attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/73attendees>
List-Post: <mailto:73attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:73attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/73attendees>,
<mailto:73attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1704652465=="
Sender: 73attendees-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: 73attendees-bounces@ietf.org
Based on my knowledge, for Chinese citizens there is no any problem to get the visa to other countries except US. _____ From: 73attendees-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:73attendees-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of David Quigley Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 1:56 PM To: Nicholas Weaver Cc: 73attendees@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria? Disclaimer: What I say here are my words and don't represent the views of my employer. >From what I see here the issues are mostly experienced by Chinese citizens. Most of the other countries have reciprocal visa agreements with the US. China however doesn't have that agreement with Ireland, Sweden, Japan, or the US. Were there similar problems with gaining entrance into Ireland? Will there be similar issues with gaining entrance into Sweden or Japan? Dave On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Nicholas Weaver <nweaver@icsi.berkeley.edu> wrote: On Nov 18, 2008, at 10:53 AM, Scott Brim wrote: Excerpts from Randy Bush on Tue, Nov 18, 2008 10:39:57AM -0600: qdang@nist.gov wrote: I believe our US government would like to grant visas to as many people as they can. However, if anyone wants to attend a meeting in the US is granted a visa to come here, then I can imagine there will be 100 million visa applications for the IETF meeting in CA next year alone. thank you for demonstrating so clearly the jingoistic prejudice at the us government level that should preclude ietf being held in the united states. How would you solve the problem? Let 100 million people in on false pretenses? I'm not going to defend the behavior of the US government, but I want you to admit that US immigration has a difficult problem. Slinging labels around doesn't help. Remember, the IETF is NOT special. There are tens of thousands of conferences, and they are all pretty much need-to-be-treated equal. If the US gave effectively carte blanch to conference attendees, you would have no immigration controls, period, as this would be a big enough loophole to fly an A380 through. The Visa issue in the US is serious, but how many people are really affected by this? We need hard data, because the notion of simply "not holding IETF meetings in a terrorist country" is not effective. And if you want to do Visa issues as a criteria, you can strongly argue that all IETF meeting SHOULD be in a country where a visa is not required for travel for EU, US, Japanese, and Canadian citizens. _______________________________________________ 73attendees mailing list 73attendees@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/73attendees
_______________________________________________ 73attendees mailing list 73attendees@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/73attendees
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3 ofdraf… 张国强
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Ross Callon
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… qdang
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Ted Lemon
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Patrik Fältström
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Randy Bush
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor 2.3ofdraft-… Eric Gray
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor 2.3ofdraft-… George Michaelson
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Dean Willis
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Iljitsch van Beijnum
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Ted Lemon
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor 2.3ofdraft-… Mike McBride (mmcbride)
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Randall Gellens
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Nicholas Weaver
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Ed Jankiewicz
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified or not ? Max Pala
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor 2.3ofdraft-… DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Scott Brim
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Randy Bush
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Melinda Shore
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Ted Lemon
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Nicholas Weaver
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… David Quigley
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor 2.3ofdraft-… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for2.3ofdraft-… Yi Zhao
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for2.3ofdraft-… Joel Jaeggli
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for2.3ofdraft-… Yi Zhao
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Randy Bush
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Fred Baker
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor 2.3ofdraft-… Dean Willis
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Dean Willis
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Randy Bush
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… David Kessens
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified or not ? Massimiliano Pala
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Dave CROCKER
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for2.3ofdraft-… Soininen Jonne (NSN FI/Espoo)
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Gene Gaines
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Dean Willis
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for2.3ofdraft-… Matthew Ford
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-p… Livingood, Jason
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-p… Nicholas Weaver
- Re: [73attendees] Is USAqualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-pa… DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-p… Max Pala
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-p… Randy Bush
- Re: [73attendees] Is USAqualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-pa… YAO Jiankang
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-p… Fernando Gont
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for2.3ofdraft-… Fred Baker
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-p… Fred Baker
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-p… James Seng
- Re: [73attendees] IsUSA qualified for 2.3ofdraft-… Tom.Petch
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… YAO Jiankang
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-p… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Dave CROCKER
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for2.3ofdraft-… Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Dave CROCKER
- Re: [73attendees] IsUSA qualified for 2.3ofdraft-… Jari Arkko
- Re: [73attendees] IsUSA qualified for 2.3ofdraft-… Marc Blanchet
- Re: [73attendees] IsUSA qualified for 2.3ofdraft-… Randy Bush
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Phillip Hallam-baker
- Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft… Raj Yaralagadda