Re: China

Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com> Fri, 08 April 2016 15:14 UTC

Return-Path: <sob@sobco.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 6433D12D91C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 08:14:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 aZiIXIJDThOC for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 08:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sobco.sobco.com (unknown [136.248.127.164]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D56DC12D1A2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 08:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sobco.sobco.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC3E81B378A1; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:14:36 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at sobco.com
Received: from sobco.sobco.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (sobco.sobco.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jHr_4Vby2ENN; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:14:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from dhcp4.sobco.com (vpn3.sobco.com [136.248.127.174]) by sobco.sobco.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D97E31B37894; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:14:35 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Subject: Re: China
From: Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com>
In-Reply-To: <31709.1460126336@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:14:33 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3CE7670A-DBE4-4B47-BB02-DDD202B99480@sobco.com>
References: <0D914666-C3D4-4CCE-AD5E-4E5B34EA1A73@piuha.net> <20160407182936.GA21340@pfrc.org> <CAB75xn780nNDjGa_Cc222J20-+1CCHt09Xp8KHzaK=n0xx51pg@mail.gmail.com> <5706B100.9040509@mnt.se> <CAB75xn6fmj84ROUtG5eUB3GerHx83hrEr3w5vSADY_g=BRg5FA@mail.gmail.com> <5706BA40.3060005@mnt.se> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1604072157240.31096@uplift.swm.pp.se> <A9B63A6D-3102-482F-8FFC-2E57A5FD8336@nic.cz> <CC16B445-2B74-4182-BC58-F9D4BFFA1CCF@chopps.org> <alpine.OSX.2.01.1604080420470.36488@rabdullah.local> <31709.1460126336@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/3HWocbuRfRnHNKfc5Epmg25p-SY>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org Discussion" <ietf@ietf.org>
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: Fri, 08 Apr 2016 15:14:39 -0000

some on the IAOC wanted to go back to SD for IETF 100 but the facilities were not available 
at the right time

Scott

> On Apr 8, 2016, at 10:38 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
> Ole Jacobsen <olejacobsen@me.com> wrote:
>> I am sorry to hear that. Our "open and inclusive process" comprises
>> many participants from China who have traditionally faced harsh and
>> unpredictable visa problems in North America. In fairness to them, we
>> held that meeting in Beijing. Note that we did so following an
>> extensive discussion on the IETF mailing list and after negotiating
>> the removal of a rather ominous hotel clause, as well as an unfiltered
>> network in the meeting venue.
> 
> Yes, and we did this openly, and I don't feel we did the same thing here.
> And there were still surprises, I'm told.
> 
> I was very surprised at the announcement for 100.
> I kinda thought we should go back to San Diego as for IETF 1.
> (well. Maybe IETF101 should be same as IETF 1... maybe IETF 100 should be
> same as IETF 0, and be entirely virtual...)
> 
> (I didn't go because I generally have funds for two IETFs a year,
> and given the hassle, and my concerns about what I would eat, it was simpler
> to skip.  I skipped BA for a combination of economic, but primarily family reasons)
> 
> 
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
> 
> 
>