Re: [82all] TICC restrictions on food/beverage

Ben Campbell <> Thu, 01 December 2011 18:18 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E011F21F91A3 for <>; Thu, 1 Dec 2011 10:18:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.6
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0dV6wbOZwDoE for <>; Thu, 1 Dec 2011 10:18:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FB0B21F91A2 for <>; Thu, 1 Dec 2011 10:18:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pB1IIqdF087715 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 1 Dec 2011 12:18:54 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Ben Campbell <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 12:18:52 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Ray Pelletier <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
Received-SPF: pass ( is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 12:30:03 -0800
Subject: Re: [82all] TICC restrictions on food/beverage
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF 82 All <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 18:18:56 -0000

Hi Ray,

I guess it depends what you consider a problem. I never witnessed enforcement of these rules, but the explicit mention caused me to change behaviors in ways that made the meetings less pleasant for me. When there were no sodas for the first couple of days, I would have brought outside sodas in had I not been warned that they weren't allowed. I have regularly done this at other meetings where the sodas were either scarce or expensive in the venue.  (I didn't discover they were available in the cafe until after the caterer started supplying them mid-week.) This would not have been an issue had the caterer supplied them all week.

OTOH, I did enjoy the pulpy apple juice.

There were also prominently displayed warnings not to bring beverages into the meeting rooms, which means you have to finish break beverages during the break. I am usually in the habit of bringing a soda or water bottle into the meeting and nursing it for the duration.  I'm used to seeing such rules for the terminal room, but not the meeting rooms.

It's interesting that these are typical provisions (and I don't doubt this is true), given that this is the first time they have been, to my knowledge, actively communicated to the attendees. If it has been typical of past meetings, it hasn't been communicated or enforced. Since they were explicitly communicated this time, I assumed that the TICC intended to enforce them. But again, I never witnessed such enforcement.



On Dec 1, 2011, at 11:35 AM, Ray Pelletier wrote:

> All;
> Prior to the meeting it was disclosed that the TICC restricted bringing outside food into the TICC, which generated a lengthy discussion on the IETF list with this subject.
> This is a typical provision in venue contract
> Did anyone encounter any difficulties in this regard?  Anecdotal evidence says not.
> Ray
> _______________________________________________
> 82all mailing list