Re: Specific Questions about Registration details for IETF 108

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Tue, 09 June 2020 19:16 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.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 223973A0D1C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 12:16:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 xSidSaiVZA88 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 12:16:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (bsa2.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED8623A0D17 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 12:16:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1jijjC-0000ph-93; Tue, 09 Jun 2020 15:16:06 -0400
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2020 15:15:59 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Specific Questions about Registration details for IETF 108
Message-ID: <C1FEB0975CA759283715AB54@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20200609102611.0c7c5db0@elandnews.com>
References: <159062833754.6110.5826748635235943562@ietfa.amsl.com> <3B19A920-9D33-4E3D-8B8B-8134A5E55316@gmail.com> <86D7C39D-9778-4408-B7CA-CB74E9572B1B@ietf.org> <511A3EE0-976B-40FF-813A-58CC115E760A@gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20200609102611.0c7c5db0@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/1K3FQXw3c37d8LVSEcxn6H0hkng>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 09 Jun 2020 19:16:15 -0000


--On Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:56 -0700 S Moonesamy
<sm+ietf@elandsys.com> wrote:

> Hi Bob,
> At 08:07 PM 03-06-2020, Bob Hinden wrote:
>> Charging different rates based on when you register doesn't
>> have  much effect on this.   You need the same level of
>> support  independent of when people register and how much
>> they pay.   I bet  you have a good idea of how many people
>> will attend independent of this.
> 
> My guess is that the number of previous remote attendees will
> decrease to around 150. 

Just for clarification, by "previous remote attendees", you mean
people who have regularly been attending remotely for some time
and not just, for example those who remotely attended IETF 107?
Right?  Or, if not, can you explain?  
>...  

> I did not factor in a new restriction [1] as I only
> noticed it a few minutes ago.

See separate thread that I'm about to start.

best,
    john