Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Tue, 18 November 2008 16:26 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 C66C028C131;
Tue, 18 Nov 2008 08:26:06 -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 B87CA28C131
for <73attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Nov 2008 08:26:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 h8+LRTiV2SI2 for <73attendees@core3.amsl.com>;
Tue, 18 Nov 2008 08:26:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from toccata.fugue.com (toccata.fugue.com [204.152.186.142])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E901028C125
for <73attendees@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Nov 2008 08:26:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [130.129.78.48] (unknown [130.129.78.48])
by toccata.fugue.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 24CA134E423C;
Tue, 18 Nov 2008 09:27:02 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <EB207D30-9428-45E1-B402-7727A4FB4F6D@fugue.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
To: qdang@nist.gov
In-Reply-To: <20081118105949.108966jc49wwndyt@webmail.nist.gov>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2)
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:26:02 -0600
References: <427021276.00739@cnnic.cn>
<3525C9833C09ED418C6FD6CD9514668C051E2DD5@emailwf1.jnpr.net>
<20081118105949.108966jc49wwndyt@webmail.nist.gov>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2)
Cc: 73attendees@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified
for 2.3ofdraft-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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes"
Sender: 73attendees-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: 73attendees-bounces@ietf.org
On Nov 18, 2008, at 9:59 AM, 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. A tourist visa isn't that useful, and the criteria for getting it are fairly restrictive. The criteria should allow anybody who is traveling to the U.S. on business to get one, and ought to exclude people who don't have visible means of support and a reason to return (I am not making a value judgment here, since I actually don't agree with U.S. policy on this, but simply stating what I understand the policy to be). However unfortunately we have had increasing problems with the U.S. government being skeptical about visa applicants - several good friends of mine have been repeatedly denied entry to the U.S. because the person responsible for admitting them decided that they were at risk of overstaying their visa. This is new, in the last year, and is the case even though these same people have a track record of /not/ overstaying their visas based on past visits. We recently tried to get a Tao master from China to come teach for a week, and despite repeated attempts, accompanied with excellent documentation, we were unable to get him a visa. I don't think we can safely assume that the new administration will fix this problem quickly, because I think it's the result of an attitude shift at the department of state. Shifting the attitude back in the right direction may be difficult. So I think that the people here who are expressing concern about the ability to get across the border are talking about a real problem that probably will persist for a while, and I think the proposed solution-- having IETF conferences in Canada in preference to the U.S.--is probably a good one. There are other North American locations that might work as well - Mexico City, for example. _______________________________________________ 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