Re: [79all] IETF Badge
Samuel Weiler <weiler+ietf@watson.org> Thu, 11 November 2010 08:17 UTC
Return-Path: <weiler+ietf@watson.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EFF53A69AC; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 00:17:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z-3M1hXkTXE2; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 00:17:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [65.122.17.41]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A1973A6911; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 00:17:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fledge.watson.org (localhost.watson.org [127.0.0.1]) by fledge.watson.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oAB8IDaY047598; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 03:18:13 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from weiler+ietf@watson.org)
Received: from localhost (weiler@localhost) by fledge.watson.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) with ESMTP id oAB8IDK2047595; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 03:18:13 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from weiler+ietf@watson.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: fledge.watson.org: weiler owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 03:18:13 -0500
From: Samuel Weiler <weiler+ietf@watson.org>
X-X-Sender: weiler@fledge.watson.org
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [79all] IETF Badge
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1011090344110.46514@fledge.watson.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format="flowed"; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.3 (fledge.watson.org [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 11 Nov 2010 03:18:14 -0500 (EST)
Cc: iaoc@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 11 Nov 2010 08:17:46 -0000
On Sunday, 7 November, the secretariat announced to the 79all list: > Please note that you will need to wear your badge at all times > during the meeting to gain access to the various meeting rooms. > Onsite security will be here to verify that only registered > attendees are allowed access to meeting sessions. At the IAOC open mike yesterday, I observed that the above announcement was made with no explanation, with no advance warning, and with no opportunity for community input. I also observed that it is a change in practice. I expressed concerns about process and transparency, not about whether we should have badge police -- let's leave that conversation for another day. The IAOC offered four explanations at the plenary: 1) There's an RFC that requires us to wear badges. 2) Badges have been checked occasionally in the past, usually in terminal rooms. 3) We've had past problems with equipment disappearing, and 4) "The local host requires ... checking the people in the meeting areas who are registered for the meeting". (Point 4 verbatim from the transcript.) Having pondered the IAOC's answers, I find that I am still confused and I remain concerned about the process. Specific follow-up questions are below. The first two answers are not on point: we do not have badge police on working group rooms at a normal IETF meeting[1]. The third answer does not justify a last-minute, unexplained change in practice: if we were concerned about theft, we could have said that months ago, just as we announced the network authentication changes. We could even have asked the community how much it cares and whether this is an acceptable solution. Which brings us to answer four: the local host imposed a requirement on us. That seems notably at odds with answer three. Which is accurate? Was this an IAOC/IETF action that could have been explained in advance, or was this a unilateral requirement from the host? If it is the former, why did the IAOC think this was an acceptable change to make at the last minute, with no explanation and no consultation? If the latter, why is the IAOC allowing the host to dictate such details of our meeting operations, particularly without any form of explanation or advance warning? In either case, I call on both the IAOC and the local host to tell the guards to back off. Let's have a normal meeting (or what remains of it), as the IAOC assured us we would. -- Sam Weiler, paid IETF79 attendee [1] Indeed, I'm not sure we have ever had badge police on the meeting rooms (v. the terminal room). No specific example was offered last night, nor do I remember one from my experience in the IETF.
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge mstjohns
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Samuel Weiler
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Peter Saint-Andre
- RE: [79all] IETF Badge Worley, Dale R (Dale)
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Dave CROCKER
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Joel Jaeggli
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Samuel Weiler
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Henk Uijterwaal
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Henk Uijterwaal
- RE: [79all] IETF Badge Worley, Dale R (Dale)
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Dave CROCKER
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Dave CROCKER
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Eliot Lear
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Hadriel Kaplan
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Hadriel Kaplan
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Andrew Allen
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Doug Ewell
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Martin Rex
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge SM
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Jaap Akkerhuis
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Scott Brim
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Lawrence Conroy
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Dave CROCKER
- Badges and blue sheets Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Ray Pelletier
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Andrew Allen
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: Badges and blue sheets JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: [IAOC] Badges and blue sheets Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Scott Brim
- Re: [IAOC] Badges and blue sheets JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- [79all] IETF Badge Scott O. Bradner
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge James M. Polk
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Scott O. Bradner
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Randall Gellens
- Re: Badges and blue sheets Tobias Gondrom
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Bjoern A. Zeeb
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [IAOC] [79all] IETF Badge Eric Burger
- Re: [IAOC] [79all] IETF Badge Eliot Lear
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Michael StJohns
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Xiangsong Cui
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Lou Berger
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Stephen Farrell
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Lawrence Conroy
- RE: [79all] IETF Badge Xiangsong Cui
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Lou Berger
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Lou Berger
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Lou Berger
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Bob Hinden
- Re: [79all] IETF Badge Patrik Faltstrom (pfaltstr)