Re: IETF 107 and Corona Virus?

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Fri, 14 February 2020 04:10 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 67949120044; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 20:10:23 -0800 (PST)
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 zjzF3Ks7We3H; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 20:10:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.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 7B5D5120046; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 20:10:20 -0800 (PST)
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 1j2SJ1-000P49-9r; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 23:10:19 -0500
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 23:10:12 -0500
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>
cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: IETF 107 and Corona Virus?
Message-ID: <BCA8C2A50E629951A2F16C7D@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <BD3C4818-43FD-47F4-A705-56AE11E55176@ietf.org>
References: <20200213130739.3F8A3D1A@m0117460.ppops.net> <200449A9145F39429CA47D2C@PSB> <CACWOCC_pozvWBmhBDVn0Be3u3v-nU6=j=Rq_xQJNh6g+mpZqVg@mail.gmail.com> <481668CE67A920D22FB45F67@PSB> <BD3C4818-43FD-47F4-A705-56AE11E55176@ietf.org>
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/5ENHt_mTZcwCvYSzmtNZHVxnYho>
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: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 04:10:23 -0000

Jay,

Thanks for the clarification.  Again, if something happens to
interfere with attendance and that is disruptive and unexpected,
I expect the registration fees are likely to be almost
insignificant relative to other costs, but it is good that the
IETF is being generous and clear about those costs anyway.

best,
  john


--On Friday, February 14, 2020 16:57 +1300 Jay Daley
<jay@ietf.org> wrote:

> 
>> On 14/02/2020, at 2:15 PM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Now consider someone who successfully obtains a visa (or does
>> not need one), makes air and hotel reservations, and arrives
>> at the airport intending to fly to the meeting.  Then,
>> because of policy shifts, they are either denied boarding or
>> arrive in the destination country and are denied admission
>> and sent home or, worse, locked up somewhere for 14 days.
> 
> ....
> 
>> Does the IETF refund the registration fee?  Current policy
>> is, I think, ambiguous, 
> 
> Just in case anyone is confused by this, the recently
> announced policy is for a full refund in the case of *any*
> government imposed travel restrictions that prevent someone
> attending the meeting, which may include, but are not limited
> to, denial of exit, denial of entry, diversion, repatriation,
> isolation and quarantine.