Re: [87attendees] [87all] IETF 87 Berlin Meeting Review

Spencer Dawkins <> Wed, 14 August 2013 17:18 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C07A21E80C4 for <>; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 10:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QehXSSsQlUYM for <>; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 10:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::235]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F331411E810B for <>; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 10:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id dn14so12407219obc.12 for <>; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 10:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=brkHYsaIdsSZobm3DWaAVRgUJ4U6cTwMmL2Gz05XorY=; b=VXLwRrAmGiR/lIiwVUvl8nd423ZIho4tlNMOLWxZxDlWBB6Pk8hkcOzHwgRM/FhWHZ 0Z4Q5bI9lavzXbFr/22DI0BFPFY/JAivuahA9VPni0iDW7kFy+oEyqB4Y5vvFBAQDqAk N7EVFxyOs1zXZSTLUUHR71hb6qDEPTOD6VjODUbJsrLuHifajI/PKJGh0Ecs5BMSfHif x/L5XgCPjFVAeilDPzOZuXrf5cZj0u7ZD71D0WXjMbXlkjtenOnrgpO62c+w3XGRfXYm JnnwBy1N8iUUr2nfT+YdrL8IndDn7NRAZEsecrp/Y+FwUZfkrto2gBNj80n3u1GMEQjv XT/A==
X-Received: by with SMTP id sy7mr10032049obc.24.1376500732425; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 10:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ([]) by with ESMTPSA id tv3sm47079286obb.8.2013. for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 14 Aug 2013 10:18:51 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 12:18:53 -0500
From: Spencer Dawkins <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Sullivan <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [87attendees] [87all] IETF 87 Berlin Meeting Review
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 17:18:53 -0000

On 8/14/2013 10:33 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> Maybe we could self-select, though. We could add a checkbox to the 
> registration form, "I won't complain too loudly on the attendees list 
> if the hotel bumps me." In the event there's a problem, the 
> secretariat could provide the list to the hotel.

I was actually asking Ray what was possible (and I had forgotten the 
"please tell us who to walk" moment from Orlando, so I was kind of 
expecting the answer to be "the hotel fills up the rooms they have in 
arrival order and then starts walking people"), and didn't intend my 
question to be a proposal (whether well thought out or not). But thanks 
to all for your thoughts.

I take the point several people made, that having the hotel (or the 
secretariat) divine where we came from and how far we traveled and what 
condition we're likely to arrive in doesn't seem robust, and also the 
point that some people might be willing to be walked for reasons that 
don't involve (real or imaginary) travel time.

If the registration form had a checkbox as Andrew described, I'd check 
it for Dallas, and probably for Vancouver and for Toronto as well. Even 
if I turned out to be the only one who checked it, I might meet 
different folks than I would have in the conference hotel, and if I 
ended up in the Nickelodeon cartoon section as people did in Orlando, 
I'd be even better prepared for the IETF week :-)

Spencer, who is not on the IAOC ...