Re: Update on feedback on US-based meetings, and IETF 102

["Joel M. Halpern" <[e-mail]>]

Stephen, there may be another factor.
I think that many of us take it as given taht it is desirable to meet in 
the US.  It may not be possible.  It may not, on balance, be what we 
choose.  But choosing to not meet in the US at all creates its own 
hardships.  (Not, I grant, comparable with what some folks get put 
through right now.)

In contrast, I am quite sure that folks who felt strongly that we should 
not meet in the US understood that for that to happen, they needed to 
make their voices heard.

Yours,
Joel

On 4/12/17 8:00 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>
> Hi Leslie,
>
> Thanks for the update. One query...
>
> On 13/04/17 00:39, IAOC Chair wrote:
>> The general comments on meeting in the US played along the same lines
>> as has been shared on the IETF discussion list:  people are variously
>> for moving all meetings out of the US, or adamantly against, or
>> somewhere in between, each position supported by good reasons.
>
> I have seen mail to the list that argued for not meeting in the US
> within our current planing horizon. Some of that was adamant. (For
> clarity: I'd agree with the position that we ought not risk meeting
> in the US for a few years, incl. that we ought, if possible, move
> ietf-102 on the basis that the we don't have a predictable situation
> with the US at the moment and that we ought not plan to meet in any
> place that's currently that unpredictable.)
>
> I do not recall the opposite on the list, i.e. someone adamantly
> arguing that we ought continue to meet in the US. There were some
> mails that I'd say maybe weakly argued for continued US meetings
> in the relevant timeframe. But nothing approaching adamant.
>
> Is that my bias in reading the list traffic or did I miss some mail,
> or is it possible that the (public) list traffic and (relatively
> private) survey responses are less similar that your mail implies?
>
> That last wouldn't be surprising, but I'd hope that in that case
> some of the people who filled in the survey who adamantly said we
> ought continue to meet in the US would be willing to justify that
> on the list. If none were, then I think the IAOC ought consider
> that as a relevant input in their decision making. (Not as a
> winning argument, but as a relevant thing.)
>
> Thanks,
> S.
>