IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [81attendees] diverse meeting locations

Dae Young KIM <dykim@cnu.ac.kr> Tue, 09 August 2011 01:12 UTC

Return-Path: <dykim6@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: 81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E881521F8BA8 for <81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 18:12:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.206
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.206 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.770, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JtWrSMPf5mLK for <81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 18:12:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gx0-f172.google.com (mail-gx0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5783E21F8BA7 for <81attendees@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 18:12:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gxk19 with SMTP id 19so1337001gxk.31 for <81attendees@ietf.org>; Mon, 08 Aug 2011 18:13:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=i1bE5yqZvRd1eLAyWVM29kdRNDMmDSxaJh+Ky+xCJ50=; b=afczMhlkTIXTnblRcOXgEbAhTtN5+RtPkfr6HZdppW/6WnJHdeIvA6ba/ms9AwqDgs v7C+hjjMeBaG5RY/V9tj5MWbkgNyPYhTWzyX/l+zbIb3yMCfTXudTNuCTOHlNZVlV0AJ Pje5hQbUOGUxnQL/jCzWvVlrTYsRRQhTCY6yQ=
Received: by 10.150.12.19 with SMTP id 19mr6265231ybl.251.1312852382119; Mon, 08 Aug 2011 18:13:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: dykim6@gmail.com
Received: by 10.151.43.11 with HTTP; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 18:12:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4E404486.7010706@nostrum.com>
References: <4E34C3A9.2020502@att.com> <A5B9F059BE69461F8008EBECD84A1E67@china.huawei.com> <80A0822C5E9A4440A5117C2F4CD36A6402713C27@DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net> <3DA9637F-1C72-43CB-B040-49F2A6FF26D9@softarmor.com> <4E398F03.1000806@dcrocker.net> <CA6BA2FE-13E7-438F-B943-7659A37DB3C5@cisco.com> <744D8CA9-9C01-41A5-A22C-CDF2F4E904EF@fugue.com> <p06240611ca64d0f07a2b@loud.pensive.org> <alpine.OSX.2.01.1108072112110.14256@sjc-vpn7-506.cisco.com> <p06240601ca65afd19752@loud.pensive.org> <alpine.OSX.2.01.1108080830460.18801@sjc-vpn7-506.cisco.com> <7309FCBCAE981B43ABBE69B31C8D213914A1EBA927@EUSAACMS0701.eamcs.ericsson.se> <CAFgODJfSOHdt-Lzz6bpnHSCSi5kLMu3Yjjh2xU5b35Dtwm5tRw@mail.gmail.com> <B819AC736B2D3745ADEA0C285E020CEB076127BF@SV-EXDB-PROD1.infinera.com> <CAFgODJecoePK7RX=+4DpwZ93qKE1HvjBq7vPOEkToxy0LfnOXg@mail.gmail.com> <4E404486.7010706@nostrum.com>
From: Dae Young KIM <dykim@cnu.ac.kr>
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:12:42 +0900
X-Google-Sender-Auth: cTpNBQpydaJ_ambexLQ6iQ41dN8
Message-ID: <CAFgODJfa6MmSk-OB_Ch0TMdwp5C2E8MDySaWKk7jTOBV1Xo+hw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000e0cdf3f6ee0f5dd04aa0843c4"
Cc: "81attendees@ietf.org" <81attendees@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [81attendees] diverse meeting locations
X-BeenThere: 81attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF 81 Attendee List <81attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/81attendees>, <mailto:81attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/81attendees>
List-Post: <mailto:81attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:81attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/81attendees>, <mailto:81attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2011 01:12:39 -0000

> So, for 2009, we went to San Francisco, Stockholm, and *Hiroshima*.
> For 2010, we went to Anaheim, Maastricht, and *Beijing*.
> For 2011, we're going to Quebec, *Taipei*, and Paris.
>

That was not the point.

>
> What is it you're asking for?
>

The point is that hotel price or an extra hop flight/ground may not be the
compelling reason to accept or reject a candidate venues.

More consideration would be like

   - can we have a good network infrastructure to the venue?

   - are cheaper alternative accommodations are available nearby?

   - if possible, is there a local host?

   - etc.

-- 
DY

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email