Re: [87attendees] IETF wireless

[joel jaeggli <[e-mail]>]

On 8/9/13 11:20 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Aug 2013, Chris Elliott wrote:
> 
>> evaluation and the technical recommendations on the suitability of
>> venues to host the network you all know and love is taken very
>> seriously, and has nixed many venues.
> 
> How do the venues react when they hear that they're being rejected on
> these grounds?

I prefer to think of this as a positive choice.

Given a options of between multiple venues with various features and
attendant compromises it seems wise to pick the one with the best
overall set of features.

having no network infrastructure to speak of or a totally inadequate
wiring plant is both an increasing rarity and pretty early survey item.

> I'm still hoping network connectivity is going to not just be a cost
> center for venues going forward, but so far it seems it's still a
> checkbox feature that isn't taken very seriously.

Some problems are hard to solve... we'd like a lot of attenuation
between meeting rooms, which is hard if they're all part of one common
space seperated by airwalls and it's less hard if the building is a
concrete bunker.