IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [89attendees] Cold breakfast :-(

Randall Gellens <randy@qti.qualcomm.com> Wed, 05 March 2014 10:06 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@qti.qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: 89attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 89attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63B6B1A039E for <89attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 02:06:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.548
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Rgbh6npyNDmW for <89attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 02:06:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sabertooth02.qualcomm.com (sabertooth02.qualcomm.com [65.197.215.38]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B0CC1A035D for <89attendees@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 02:06:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qti.qualcomm.com; i=@qti.qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1394013978; x=1425549978; h=message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:to:from:subject: cc:mime-version; bh=xKUIufE/srzLk8ORxTm8sWBUoJjRMSZq3BvE2jzDUXc=; b=UnOkCQ+9qcrmjBoK45yITRDpK4ytTt/ozhNYXxML9VBCeFci9X5sNDk0 wnt4M2qaMWuUec+sws6RLfS608687261vo2winCLXbWfzr3CtDuYEhcfi ese22Qu3IDGUN1fEThI/Pz2m2bKP7kGngl4rqD1rckDRrUjtLQQGywqW9 E=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,7367"; a="60211062"
Received: from ironmsg01-lv.qualcomm.com ([10.47.202.180]) by sabertooth02.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 05 Mar 2014 02:06:18 -0800
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,591,1389772800"; d="scan'208";a="28056485"
Received: from nasanexhc08.na.qualcomm.com ([172.30.39.7]) by ironmsg01-lv.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 05 Mar 2014 02:06:18 -0800
Received: from dhcp-a7b2.meeting.ietf.org (172.30.39.5) by qcmail1.qualcomm.com (172.30.39.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 02:06:17 -0800
Message-ID: <p06240603cf3ca718acdd@dhcp-a7b2.meeting.ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <9F4E575C-DFA3-448B-9853-06DBD6F63D6F@bangj.com>
References: <53167430.1050007@alum.mit.edu> <A4BAAB326B17CE40B45830B745F70F1046FE9DAC@VOEXM17W.internal.vodafone.c om> <9F4E575C-DFA3-448B-9853-06DBD6F63D6F@bangj.com>
X-Mailer: Eudora for Mac OS X
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 02:06:12 -0800
To: Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com>, "Smith, Kevin, (R&D) Vodafone Group" <Kevin.Smith@vodafone.com>
From: Randall Gellens <randy@qti.qualcomm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Random-Sig-Tag: 1.0b28
X-Originating-IP: [172.30.39.5]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/89attendees/4QtH55lX1S3ZTcKR0tZgoa2mbfs
Cc: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>, "89attendees@ietf.org" <89attendees@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [89attendees] Cold breakfast :-(
X-BeenThere: 89attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list of IETF 89 attendees that have opted in to the list." <89attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/89attendees>, <mailto:89attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/89attendees/>
List-Post: <mailto:89attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:89attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/89attendees>, <mailto:89attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2014 10:06:23 -0000

At 9:26 AM +0000 3/5/14, Tom Pusateri wrote:

>  I would rather the IETF not negotiate breakfast on my behalf. If 
> the IETF has some negotiating advantage, use it for room prices.

I think hotels are often happy to throw in breakfast for group 
bookings, not so much for individual bookings.  So it may often be 
very advantagious for the IETF to negotiate it.

>  In my case, my wife and daughter are with me. They are allowed to 
> eat downstairs in the main dining room but I am not. So I am not 
> allowed to eat with my family unless I pay full price for breakfast 
> downstairs to join them.

Why is your wife and daughter permitted to have breakfast at no cost 
in the restaurant?  And why are you not?

-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
Men and nations may sometimes act rationally when all other
possibilities have been exhausted.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email