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

Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@hotmail.com> Thu, 13 April 2017 02:28 UTC

Return-Path: <eng.khaled.omar@hotmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45A87126C26 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 19:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.145
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.145 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2=0.874, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=hotmail.com
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 7g3Y7G1vx633 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 19:28:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR02-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-oln040092069068.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.92.69.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88495124C27 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 19:28:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hotmail.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=eych1wXbVpLovu2xR6IyUgCPp1jPdOxlH8wxebMJKEs=; b=QzQxwfrOcewXjjmrhpJBKffT6ZouJfVl4GicrZvNM1Cj6v10Vpaw0YnWv/9/Ah6vIrDGwW7oZGmL16Z4Z2Dw4QkojwMVB8tiKewJmaCWg8hcbTPjhIXg81gokLACPoDMPy67PLClVj+FXVTadlDNyE/b5c6qTmda/Iz46UQGuECYHPrbJYJ+rxwf8o/Jf2QQeE8w+oI48QvNnc4FtywdIrlr2izmarCV+G9YgbSNM3IAEKw3GtNmr0jBOEI8tLU3g5GELe7jXnrm+ZzROvOnXMLqUPTHStlKs30oLAx0oyBek8ohOqtfumhK2Fqx3T4nCR1JzDAiQUEi0JckIaTSUg==
Received: from AM5EUR02FT010.eop-EUR02.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.8.58) by AM5EUR02HT159.eop-EUR02.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.9.174) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.1019.14; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 02:28:28 +0000
Received: from AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com (10.152.8.56) by AM5EUR02FT010.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.8.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1019.14 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 02:28:28 +0000
Received: from AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::167:4fb:cc08:25a5]) by AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::167:4fb:cc08:25a5%19]) with mapi id 15.01.1019.026; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 02:28:28 +0000
From: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@hotmail.com>
To: Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com>
CC: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Update on feedback on US-based meetings, and IETF 102
Thread-Topic: Update on feedback on US-based meetings, and IETF 102
Thread-Index: AQHSs+Y54XIpMDBpUUKi5tFZaQ2HSw==
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 02:28:28 +0000
Message-ID: <AM4PR0401MB2241AB792647E5766373588ABD020@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
References: <F21BFB22-BA7D-411B-BF13-141CD6886621@thinkingcat.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: thinkingcat.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;thinkingcat.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=hotmail.com;
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:7EBC202A18AAEB9756D17FE550FE4814A78886A11E7F5BC969AA84F9E6203582; UpperCasedChecksum:35DAA510FBEA097679A834F7C62B9B0F89B1200EB1896325CD35CDFD57FA717A; SizeAsReceived:7867; Count:39
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; AM5EUR02HT159; 5:lZxdOHkzpcjgp4m8aMNythO01+/HrpjVaOE6Z4MANw0zJE7tyKxeCjNsBMb40+UwUPA8gdqkPCf2StFo711v7M2R8CA3fLjgvi2ivo85EOEE8LbrZQZe1EKbY04BRTghrzk3u5aSQ8wfZv0vqZvH0w==; 24:OxwXurNZ6O0/lNQcP3j+iFVeOrFL5nn39GYhD8ZCxcKv0xHewA6KTtO+/UwJBmIDEtKS3aj3PLcN3PDwwCDdQhKPs64igxRFFbHVsqOOLm8=; 7:PN5zyukp5/BRrsHQzNsEqBuCOeQid6DLb2l0E4sqX8r0FA0eLGKrUM+HlfJ7Z94U7CmnRHNtGDxOtw9GxCDozyLJja+vL+AF4LHLR3QvW2ZbY4tFuCr1/E1tQ/CPuU9JMyACPa9gEr8rZYkXasuSxlymjgqAFpyvh5zHnv7se4xV6h5kB+MS9ptM8i3vePm1XduhVvauUEdhm/ivTYxiH5u+wsRhVYkwZN4W1gMmhSb+6KXfzhxZ0RwU3VIHlDIVQdiAa6PUwdJAkkKMtdKhZigVSA4/sJXwqKW3D4hIvDIjDhyHh9OE91Yk678NpBxL
x-incomingheadercount: 39
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-forefront-antispam-report: EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(7070007)(98901004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1901; SCL:1; SRVR:AM5EUR02HT159; H:AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 4c260085-94cd-4fc4-d877-08d48214c468
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(201702061074)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(2017031320274)(2017031324274)(2017031323274)(2017031322274)(1601125374)(1603101448)(1701031045); SRVR:AM5EUR02HT159;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(444000031); SRVR:AM5EUR02HT159; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:AM5EUR02HT159;
x-forefront-prvs: 02760F0D1C
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_AM4PR0401MB2241AB792647E5766373588ABD020AM4PR0401MB2241_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Apr 2017 02:28:28.3153 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM5EUR02HT159
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/1BPfcRBZ-bpMeBhWHnS374jCZaA>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 02:28:33 -0000

Hi Leslie,

Unfortunately I did not know about this questionair, so if I can make a suggestion regarding the next IETF meetings' location, I would suggest Cairo, Egypt as one of the locations to be considered for an IETF meeting, positive IETF participants will be welcomed here and will enjoy the sunny weather all the year.

For me it was difficult to attend the meeting held in U.S. in person and it was also difficult to attend remotely, so if Egypt will be considered for a meeting, i'm sure participants will enjoy time here during the meeting.

Best Regards,


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Fwd: Update on feedback on US-based meetings, and IETF 102
From: Leslie Daigle
To: "Ietf@Ietf. Org"
CC: IAOC@ietf.org



FYI — this is the information as we have it.

Leslie.

--

________________________________

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises LLC

ldaigle@thinkingcat.com<mailto:ldaigle@thinkingcat.com>

Forwarded message:

From: IAOC Chair iaoc-chair@ietf.org<mailto:iaoc-chair@ietf.org>
To: IETF Announcement List ietf-announce@ietf.org<mailto:ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Subject: Update on feedback on US-based meetings, and IETF 102
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 16:39:18 -0700

On March 31, 2017, we put out a request for input on experiences with travel to the recent IETF meeting in the US, and solicited information pertinent to plans to attend IETF meetings within or outside the US in the coming years. We have had over 350 responses to the questionnaire, and we appreciate each and every one of them! We did not gather the data in such a way for it to reflect a representative sample of the IETF community, or of potential meeting attendees. But we did gain insights from those who responded that we did not have before.

Over 40% of the respondents said they had attended 20 or more IETF meetings, and over 50% of them said they were authors of active working group documents. Slightly more than 40% stated US residency, and just less than 60% said they were not US-resident.

There was a noted impact of the recent changes to US travel policies and procedures. Of the respondents living outside of the US who did NOT attend the IETF meeting in Chicago, a few were denied visas or entry into the US, and more than 30 said they did not come because of concerns about US travel restrictions. On the other hand 45 people said they were not troubled by the US situation (and presumably chose not to come for other reasons).

For those who did travel to IETF 98 in Chicago, the written comments were illuminating: most people had no issues (for some, even a smoother border crossing than usual); some people experienced the expected flutter over visa approvals as things were in flux as the US Executive Order and court stays played out, but were eventually able to come.

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.

The IAOC is continuing to gather data on travel to the US, concerns about traveling outside of it, and what alternatives are possible for IETF 102. Our focus is currently on whether holding IETF 102 in San Francisco is the best option to meet the needs of IETF work, recognizing that we cannot predict the future. While it may take several weeks to allow for review and negotiation of any alternatives (if applicable), we are moving as quickly as possible because we realize that people will need time to plan their travel.

Leslie, for the IAOC.