Re: limiting our set of cities

Michael Richardson <> Thu, 20 February 2020 12:43 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A27721200EF; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 04:43:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bkfACIASqnmv; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 04:43:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3D7912001A; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 04:43:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 580861F458; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 12:43:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by (Postfix, from userid 179) id 7F1E81A3B6D; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 13:43:06 +0100 (CET)
From: Michael Richardson <>
To: "Maisonneuve\, Julien \(Nokia - FR\/Paris-Saclay\)" <>
cc: Jay Daley <>, IETF discussion list <>
Subject: Re: limiting our set of cities
In-reply-to: <>
References: <> <> <17764.1582194882@dooku> <>
Comments: In-reply-to "Maisonneuve, Julien (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay)" <> message dated "Thu, 20 Feb 2020 12:22:17 +0000."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 25.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 13:43:06 +0100
Message-ID: <24641.1582202586@dooku>
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 12:43:11 -0000

    > Can you tell the community if the LLC has any plans/thoughts to stop
    > looking for new places to meet, rather to just establish a list of
    > 10-15 cities where we have successfully met, and simply repeat?

julien> Sticking with the same set of 10-15 cities over time can become
julien> problematic if some drop off the list when conditions degrade (in one
julien> of the may scales we use for selection). Likewise previously unlikely
julien> cities can become possible again when conditions
julien> improve. Possibilities for renewal are important.

I don't know how much the IETF LLC plans to spend for investigation of new
cities, but the previous IAOC spent some significant effort investigating new

So, of course, we'll have to add if we see that we are losing things.
This is not a straight-jacket, but rather, a policy statement that we prefer
returning to known-good places.

Some SDOs just keep going back to exactly the same 3-4 places. Period.
IEEE 802 has some set pattern, I think.

Michael Richardson <>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-