Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?

[Ed Jankiewicz <[e-mail]>]

If we could separate the humor from the serious issue here (assuming the 
100 million was facetious), it would be interesting to know how many (if 
any) spurious applications for visas that an IETF meeting would 
generate.  If the issue is that the US State Dept. can't sort through a 
huge number of irrelevant applications (i.e. those attempting to game 
the visa system) to find to the qualified attendees that is one 
problem.  If the issue is that 3-4 months is not sufficient for a small 
number (<1000) of bona-fide applicants to get approved, that is a 
different problem.  In either case, it would behoove all US participants 
to write their representatives to influence the State Department to 
modify procedures to facilitate the timely processing of qualified 
applicants (many of whom are repeat attendees at IETF).  If 
international contributors cannot attend meetings in the US, more 
meetings will have to be outside the US, there could be significantly 
less US participation, and one more instance of short-sighted American 
protectionism resulting in a reduced US role in a vital international 
organization.  That's as jingoistic as I get - it is definitely in US 
interest to fully participate in the global economy and facilitate 
international efforts like IETF.  And I want the US to influence and 
benefit from the future of the Internet.

Speaking purely as an individual, not representing my company or our 
customers.

Might I suggest to the powers-that-be that they come up with proposed 
text for a "letter to my congressman" that would help solve this 
problem?  I notice on the attendee list that there are a number of 
registered folks who did not pay (assume that means they could not come) 
and the majority of them are non-US.  That indicates to me that this has 
become a serious impediment to some folks attending when meetings are in 
the US, and I for one would like to see some portion of meetings to 
remain in the US.  Many of my colleagues have the opposite problem, 
being a difficulty with getting funding approval for international 
travel for conferences, and I would like to see more of them 
participating at IETF. 

On the other hand, Canada is a reasonable stop-gap to faciltate non-US 
participation without too much additional burden on US participants.  
Both Vancouver and Montreal were nice meeting locations, and Toronto 
should be as well.  For those of us on the east coast of USA, Toronto 
and Montreal are closer that several large US cities, and Vancouver is 
quite convenient for folks on the west coast.

Ed J.

Randy Bush wrote:
> [e-mail] 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.
>
> randy
> _______________________________________________
> 73attendees mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/73attendees
>   

_______________________________________________
73attendees mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/73attendees