IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [89attendees] Cold breakfast :-(

Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com> Wed, 05 March 2014 09:26 UTC

Return-Path: <pusateri@bangj.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 2FEC91A00F2 for <89attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 01:26:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.037
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.037 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 sZ8Q2kACoxnQ for <89attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 01:26:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from oj.bangj.com (amt0.gin.ntt.net [129.250.11.170]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B0F01A000D for <89attendees@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 01:26:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-a504.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-a504.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.165.4]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by oj.bangj.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 074F22B90; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 04:26:11 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0AE99B34-AB0D-4BFB-8ECA-5FF7F511E3D0"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
From: Tom Pusateri <pusateri@bangj.com>
In-Reply-To: <A4BAAB326B17CE40B45830B745F70F1046FE9DAC@VOEXM17W.internal.vodafone.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 09:26:08 +0000
Message-Id: <9F4E575C-DFA3-448B-9853-06DBD6F63D6F@bangj.com>
References: <53167430.1050007@alum.mit.edu> <A4BAAB326B17CE40B45830B745F70F1046FE9DAC@VOEXM17W.internal.vodafone.com>
To: "Smith, Kevin, (R&D) Vodafone Group" <Kevin.Smith@vodafone.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/89attendees/_AaOb-isufmT8T8RyLYKW-8aVas
Cc: "89attendees@ietf.org" <89attendees@ietf.org>, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
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 09:26:20 -0000

On Mar 5, 2014, at 9:15 AM, Smith, Kevin, (R&D) Vodafone Group <Kevin.Smith@vodafone.com> wrote:

> No, it's an international hotel chain, which IME have no bearing on any country's cuisine whatsoever...
> 
> Cheers :)
> Kevin


This should be the main take-away point here. It's hard for any hotel to get this right.

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

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.

Tom

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email