Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input

Sandoche Balakrichenan <sandoche.balakrichenan@afnic.fr> Tue, 24 May 2016 13:42 UTC

Return-Path: <sandoche.balakrichenan@afnic.fr>
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 BAD3812D18B for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 May 2016 06:42:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] 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 JWuLN28dyoxN for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 May 2016 06:42:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D93A112D765 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2016 06:42:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id EAC54280337 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2016 15:42:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5FC92800F2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2016 15:42:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from zimbra.afnic.fr (hebe.prod-int.prive.th3.nic.fr [10.1.81.80]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E456CB3800C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2016 15:41:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.afnic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E103C10C403D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2016 15:41:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from zimbra.afnic.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.afnic.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id iJRhmgqHwBv2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2016 15:41:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.afnic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FC7810C403C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2016 15:41:53 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.afnic.fr
Received: from zimbra.afnic.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.afnic.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id Lv-AzCqoD4N3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2016 15:41:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ip-10-0-90-31.sa.vpn.nic.fr (ip-10-0-90-31.sa.vpn.nic.fr [10.0.90.31]) by zimbra.afnic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 09EB810C403B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2016 15:41:53 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <D3662363.190A96%jon.peterson@neustar.biz> <CAP8yD=spam0tQdfD-ssA6y_n-cuugHtrHKwTYieSruo8SMg_VQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAHkmkwtEtDk4sPv3GjkrSFqOdRV3HBA5i2_uZu3X2D4RxSF4wA@mail.gmail.com> <2e95fd51-23b8-39e7-d4ca-a9fc9d49559c@gmail.com> <CAHkmkwsf3YfFfR7jUHYnaw6dCrasMOazjbXPJRRhZS28k8HV0w@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1605241405210.28372@uplift.swm.pp.se> <714DDDE2-562D-488A-AAAA-F8DE3C2CA97D@consulintel.es> <FE76F502-617E-4190-BFF5-649EC9CFECAC@consulintel.es>
From: Sandoche Balakrichenan <sandoche.balakrichenan@afnic.fr>
Message-ID: <57445A20.2060005@afnic.fr>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 15:41:52 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <FE76F502-617E-4190-BFF5-649EC9CFECAC@consulintel.es>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/1l1YwRlhGYDHRB-K52yYC88gxHw>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 24 May 2016 13:42:57 -0000

I am not for or against to have IETF 100 in Singapore.

But i would like to post a real issue here.

A PhD student (with an Indian Passport) was quite excited for having a
paper accepted at a Conference in the US.
After having submitted his passport for Visa at the US embassy, they
took it for a background check and they returned it to him after one
month. He could not attend the conference, but he did get the visa after
one month. Just imagine if something happend to his family back in India
during the one month period, he could not travel because the passport
was with the US embassy. The only way to contact the US embassy in Paris
was by phone and everytime you had to give your credit card number, and
they took 18 euros for each call.

Hence, my suggestion is that IETF should take the visa issue also into
account when considering a venue.

Sandoche.

On 24/05/16 14:25, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
> I will go further:
>
>       The same must apply for any country where death penalty is still applied.
>
> Saludos,
> Jordi
>
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: ietf <ietf-bounces@ietf.org> en nombre de Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
> Responder a: Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
> Fecha: martes, 24 de mayo de 2016, 14:22
> Para: <ietf@ietf.org>
> Asunto: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
>
>> +1
>>
>> Saludos,
>> Jordi
>>
>>
>> -----Mensaje original-----
>> De: ietf <ietf-bounces@ietf.org> en nombre de Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
>> Organización: People's Front Against WWW
>> Responder a: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
>> Fecha: martes, 24 de mayo de 2016, 14:09
>> Para: Harish Pillay <harish.pillay@gmail.com>
>> CC: <ietf@ietf.org>
>> Asunto: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
>>
>>> On Mon, 23 May 2016, Harish Pillay wrote:
>>>
>>>> ever used. That is my world experience. When I travel to the US and
>>>> I see people carrying weapons, how am I supposed to react/respond?
>>> Let me +1 this here, I am seriously scared for my life whenever I interact 
>>> with law enforcement officers in the US, just from the fact that I know 
>>> they have to interact with armed people all the time and have to be 
>>> cautious that anyone they interact with has a decent likelyhood to be 
>>> armed.
>>>
>>> http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-law-basics/states-that-have-stand-your-ground-laws.html
>>>
>>> If we can't go to Singapore because they happen to have anti-LGBT laws on 
>>> the books, then I suggest we do not have any further meetings in USA at 
>>> all, especially not states that have stand-your-ground laws on their 
>>> books.
>>>
>>> As opposed to Singapore where anti-LGBT laws aren't really enforced, in 
>>> USA these kinds of laws seems to be on the rise instead of things getting 
>>> better.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> **********************************************
>> IPv4 is over
>> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
>> http://www.consulintel.es
>> The IPv6 Company
>>
>> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.
>>
>>
>
>