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

Ted Lemon <> Sat, 17 August 2013 18:14 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D9CB11E823A for <>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.581
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.581 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.018, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tN1smljCY7yV for <>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:14:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFFB511E823C for <>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:14:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) (using TLSv1) by ([]) with SMTP ID DSNKUg+9hvfhFOgMhCWJ1YfSnmgXxU2/; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:14:30 PDT
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 457961B8244 for <>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:14:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 901F019005D; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:14:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([]) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:14:23 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <>
To: Mary Barnes <>
Thread-Topic: [87attendees] [87all] IETF 87 Berlin Meeting Review
Thread-Index: AQHOmzCuzJeY/++0aEaqtFKDs/PWW5maFVKAgAAU2QA=
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 18:14:22 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "" <>, Hermin Anggawijaya <>
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: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 18:14:37 -0000

On Aug 17, 2013, at 12:59 PM, Mary Barnes <> wrote:
> I totally agree with this concern and it's been mentioned before, but I don't believe it's become a factor in choosing meeting locations.  That's why I'm very happy that we're going to Vancouver in late fall.  I spent more to fly to Vancouver last summer than it cost for me to fly to the Beijing Meeting.  In my experience  (I live in major airline hub city), airfares during peak times are at least 30% higher than off peak.   My guess is the fact that nice cities at nice times of year increases attendance may be one of the reasons it's not being considered as a factor. 

That explains the crappy connection I was able to get, and the high price as well.

FWIW, I already booked my Vancouver tickets for this fall, and I decided to travel through Seattle rather than Vancouver, because connections to Vancouver aren't as good.   Seattle has light rail to the airport (like Vancouver) and there's Amtrak service from Seattle to Vancouver.  The flight to Seattle was way cheap (that's why I just bought it instead of waiting).   The added bonus is that I take the train back to Seattle Friday afternoon, and then I can take an earlier nonstop from Seattle back to Boston on Saturday.

I don't know how this will turn out in practice, so I'm not _recommending_ it to other IETFers, but if you're feeling adventurous, it's something to consider.   It probably doesn't make sense for you if you can't get a nonstop to/from Seattle.   One thing I did to be on the safe side is that I allowed for a rather long layover in Seattle, which I will spend being a tourist if the connection works out well.

(Beware: there is a Vancouver, Washington, and it's on the same Amtrak line as Vancouver, BC.   Don't accidentally book a train going the wrong direction!)