Re: [78attendees] We'll meet again...

joel jaeggli <joelja@gmail.com> Fri, 06 August 2010 22:52 UTC

Return-Path: <joelja@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: 78attendees@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 78attendees@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA3A3A6A6B for <78attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Aug 2010 15:52:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 cCFiBpGHgi1k for <78attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Aug 2010 15:52:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com (mail-ww0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1DA93A68E1 for <78attendees@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Aug 2010 15:52:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wwj40 with SMTP id 40so1554179wwj.13 for <78attendees@ietf.org>; Fri, 06 Aug 2010 15:52:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bhhD23uMBkSx4x+a0WE40Exl5hsxUCU5H7esJTeJiRY=; b=F5SP+AIAOmRQOg96h7hDzAqVDuivmU+LA7bX9b4Y1RjXtBRuGSjIT07fVyWVGnqgD1 jbSqQOVRfwNfuSHuQrFPOB7P8sIblGb2IE7fFG6qSsC2jv7ae1bBNfCH6UmVeKCSe0ki yaFTCRZD+1y4BIXYRiJBhWVtPLnXIXNTHbznM=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Kw0HipGPcZJ1lOG1v82Ir0o+MflJ/YNQYN4wYdP2gbEOx/O6TayfOLL6mVp2sBCNcQ G2ZzNPFXX2uymKHB/CZsJRaa9pqWzObWUeuY8kfcOvHiM2jJTXCHi8/7a0MULVZXSD50 jAco4qLA9FzNtXr+IJ8ZJ/L1zW9BZWGS/sIHw=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.10.77 with SMTP id 55mr11329493weu.17.1281135164737; Fri, 06 Aug 2010 15:52:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.54.16 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Aug 2010 15:52:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20100806222110.GC4598@nsn.com>
References: <4C528047.20008@sidn.nl> <C2D311A6F086424F99E385949ECFEBCB03453A16@CORPUSMX80B.corp.emc.com> <4C5288FF.7000102@att.com> <4C53159C.2040806@ogud.com> <5CC58151-05C5-45CE-BCE6-13A6BF3731D3@nominum.com> <A4C6A166C36F5F40A5767E6F66358FC090ED0CF769@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <20100806042805.GA7232@nsn.com> <CD5674C3CD99574EBA7432465FC13C1B21FE98EF7C@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com> <A4C6A166C36F5F40A5767E6F66358FC090ED0CFC6E@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <20100806222110.GC4598@nsn.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 15:52:44 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=KiFYYNVRqGcM0ZSr+2vrcu+1-q-jResPSQ4Q8@mail.gmail.com>
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@gmail.com>
To: David Kessens <david.kessens@nsn.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "78attendees@ietf.org" <78attendees@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [78attendees] We'll meet again...
X-BeenThere: 78attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF 78 attendees list <78attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/78attendees>, <mailto:78attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/78attendees>
List-Post: <mailto:78attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:78attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/78attendees>, <mailto:78attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2010 22:52:15 -0000

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 3:21 PM, David Kessens <david.kessens@nsn.com> wrote:
>
> Tom,
>
> On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 10:43:51AM -0400, Thomas Walsh wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps smaller isn't the right word.  Some people were complaining about
>> having easier airline access than Maastricht or Hiroshima afforded. Applying
>> that as a screen would have meant missing such wonderful venues as these
>> two. I'd like to keep the focus on the nice job of the Maastricht host.
>
> I agree ;-). I had the same thought initially but then started thinking
> that Hiroshima couldn't possibly as small as Maastricht ...
>
> I do think we have to be careful with our words, as the IAOC might decide
> to go to Minneapolis again if we tell them that we like smaller cities ;-).

Metro MSP/Hennepin county is the 16th largest metro Area in the US...
it's 2/3 the size of finland or 1/5 the size of the netherlands by
population.

> Words like secondary cities within a particular region/country might be more
> what we were looking for.
>
> On the hand, I personally like the variation of going to many different
> types of venues and locations: if I have to travel for work, I can as well
> see something different each time even if it costs me some extra (personal)
> travel time.
>
> David Kessens
> ---
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: WORLEY, Dale R (Dale) [mailto:dworley@avaya.com]
>> Sent: Friday, August 06, 2010 7:23 AM
>> To: David Kessens; Thomas Walsh
>> Cc: 78attendees@ietf.org
>> Subject: RE: [78attendees] We'll meet again...
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: 78attendees-bounces@ietf.org [78attendees-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of David Kessens [david.kessens@nsn.com]
>>
>> I am wondering, what is your definition of a small city ? Hiroshima's
>> population would be the 4th largest city of the US if transplanted to the
>> US. Or to say it in another way, it is larger than San Jose and San
>> Francisco combined.
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Though Hiroshima would rank only 20th considering metro area populations.  But the 20th ranked metro area in the US is Denver, and nobody would consider Denver to be "too small" to host an IETF.
>>
>> Hiroshima's metro population is about 20 times that of Maastricht.
>>
>> Dale
> _______________________________________________
> 78attendees mailing list
> 78attendees@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/78attendees
>