IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [81attendees] are we getting complacent? Good job!

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Mon, 01 August 2011 16:40 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
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 9ACA121F8C40 for <81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 09:40:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.673
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.673 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.536, BAYES_00=-2.599, PLING_QUERY=1.39, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2LfV2PFM8yB6 for <81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 09:40:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E22D21F8C36 for <81attendees@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 09:40:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [128.9.160.252] (pen.isi.edu [128.9.160.252]) (authenticated bits=0) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p71GeY0B019589 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 1 Aug 2011 09:40:34 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4E36D701.50704@isi.edu>
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 09:40:33 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
References: <4E34C3A9.2020502@att.com> <A5B9F059BE69461F8008EBECD84A1E67@china.huawei.com> <80A0822C5E9A4440A5117C2F4CD36A6402713C27@DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net> <DB9C80EF-5231-40B9-B9A9-D0EFB3744DC7@isi.edu> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1108011106280.3518@joyce.lan> <67CD028F-3C38-4036-B130-EBD47B6F2AAE@isi.edu> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1108011122330.3518@joyce.lan>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1108011122330.3518@joyce.lan>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: "<81attendees@ietf.org>" <81attendees@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [81attendees] are we getting complacent? Good job!
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: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 16:40:59 -0000

On 8/1/2011 8:41 AM, John R. Levine wrote:
>>> Quebec is within driving distance of about 1/4 of the population in
>>> North
>>> America. Vancouver isn't.

NA = 530M

Canada - Quebec province = 26M
Eastern US states within dist = (all in millions)
	CT = 3.5
	ME = 1.3
	MA = 6.4
	NH = 1.3
	NY = 19
	RI = 1
	VT = 0.6

	Some major cities out of dist:
		NYC (8hrs) = 8
		Boston (6 hrs) = 4

	i.e., 21.1M possibly within dist

That's a total of 47.1M out of 530M

Not even 10%, and that includes a LOT of places nobody would ever drive 
from.

Agreed that Vancouver is even less useful for driving (under 7M), but 
how many attendees drove (not just from nearby airports)?

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email