IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Sat, 17 August 2013 18:22 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: 87attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 87attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A0B611E8163 for <87attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:22:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.581
X-Spam-Level:
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 mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XLTlUuyk270y for <87attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:22:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og106.obsmtp.com (exprod7og106.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.165]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A46F21F9D21 for <87attendees@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:22:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob106.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUg+/ZqZmQVnZEK2jIYwanZSNlUui3XLF@postini.com; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:22:30 PDT
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECE151B8257 for <87attendees@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:22:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E65C019005D; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:22:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.131]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:22:30 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@nomountain.net>
Thread-Topic: [87attendees] [87all] IETF 87 Berlin Meeting Review
Thread-Index: AQHOmzCuzJeY/++0aEaqtFKDs/PWW5maFVKAgAAHswCAAAxjAIAAAwiA
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 18:22:28 +0000
Message-ID: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775259D6B@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
References: <CAJgsEzVK1E-RYDo4kGnxeueOqyDOyXz7AeMAXysBTnko_pu4ug@mail.gmail.com> <CABmDk8mE11Qbz3mLq1Ef_itukTzCCDBtkNZJ0XCz6HVyB2AZaw@mail.gmail.com> <520FB278.9050609@dcrocker.net> <520FBCDC.6080808@nomountain.net>
In-Reply-To: <520FBCDC.6080808@nomountain.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-ID: <7E95F9DDF885CF419E34DB650A777917@nominum.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "<87attendees@ietf.org>" <87attendees@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [87attendees] [87all] IETF 87 Berlin Meeting Review
X-BeenThere: 87attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <87attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/87attendees>, <mailto:87attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/87attendees>
List-Post: <mailto:87attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:87attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/87attendees>, <mailto:87attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 18:22:49 -0000

On Aug 17, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@nomountain.net> wrote:
> I consider it a negative, since it has a negative impact on
> travel and distracts from the meeting.  It's a working meeting,
> people.

Yes and no.   Yes, it's a negative for IETF to be a junket, because that becomes an attractive nuisance—people go because they want to go to the city IETF will be held in, rather than because they really have pressing business at IETF.   No, it's not a negative, because cities that are good tourist destinations are often (not always, cf. Orlando) good places to have meetings, because there is a variety of food near the venue.

I always thought Minneapolis in winter was a good choice—it's a lovely city, but not really a winter city, so you get convenient food _and_ nobody goes just for the fun of it.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email