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

Vinayak Hegde <vinayakh@gmail.com> Wed, 25 May 2016 21:09 UTC

Return-Path: <vinayakh@gmail.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 AFC2312D1E3 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 May 2016 14:09:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 El-t5ZAQnhug for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 May 2016 14:09:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qg0-x233.google.com (mail-qg0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 881B412D9DA for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 May 2016 14:09:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qg0-x233.google.com with SMTP id q32so28669305qgq.3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 May 2016 14:09:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=euRNXUr0WmzfZg/mMD6poRc+ccr7PbMjv4y9/ELLYAM=; b=0GfdTHbGQzIMcX/htG83pWmhS7Jv2KMwSlGGXa5QaXS1EQA0IBu9DDv9xfjT7QaG2Z /z41aDKGDumr9pskBdm+gM5XEcDR4wEPRBF10Vs29j957PN7PY2ZBRsXtCswahhow4xo Weul6S6jwvymRonopMQufV8GLKpQPfXj5YhdFmlpwO03aHW6sShJBQVHw5LAYhhSeVuP FJwi9XVIyu1DxnEa9eTOGlsWVXw9ZEu/YSW6558+vasive9NBOFnuaZHqxGPitYhdocW KkFBzQr6677Atjr0+u5X75doqfsFH/X1HIGyy9g4eF0SqrRnU04G+kEhYCjVFanjcCAr 81ZA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=euRNXUr0WmzfZg/mMD6poRc+ccr7PbMjv4y9/ELLYAM=; b=THRoFC6vDTxI2L2N76anAdbIZiLvTET3ya/cj9AmfK/8xTT6fEqSzCuyOqIY/Y39sc nWH9TTbTCrW+Y9Zux2L8UxK1pQwMe70+OBGaQ5k3pFHDSRoDETmvxKhpS9esHyXSS5cg 3j1YcAYPSbvLCFqN48SwuxjE6MD4F4u1ugLF9BhnO4FS0k4APeM9qnUr5gZCaQ6zU3e4 H46pSJbIR3P7tMIoav8NI0VENFG0oj/eolOXQ41imH7Mv8OiKZYo2b7Iv/W27agqAdUJ NXdF7g+CsUUNtf9LIZt8OvwTTBJxsJbYbRMJC1LF/0upFWpTcN1foLFTvrAT2bynjkk4 2lQg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIvDc/0MLNT0Oadc3bXi3JiZ07VEyl7BtzrWSU2Mx4vU3lfjoXfJsdEu9rZz/WaUvXLx+1/CH/vuxSSZw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.176.3.20 with SMTP id 20mr3590252uat.102.1464210548654; Wed, 25 May 2016 14:09:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.103.18.7 with HTTP; Wed, 25 May 2016 14:09:08 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.20.1605251647560.27848@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <20160524210344.64781.qmail@ary.lan> <5f7621d7-326d-3d94-0b78-5a463dd6c496@gmail.com> <1940321298.573455.1464202942241.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <08f1ee7c-eb15-77bf-9e7e-5a164e5a38f9@gmail.com> <CAPt1N1mOMf9u+CXwhrjtD9R7FJOq1=6N+T3zHKJHVfSdy0t_Uw@mail.gmail.com> <d33789e4-caf5-21be-e4b1-a7d3065d43fe@gmail.com> <CAPt1N1mhK=p1YboDnKE5xF+gdMdXkOZBqbpaodkaq8jR0Lophw@mail.gmail.com> <75ca0a38-0807-a91f-5b2a-bab8f6fc7042@gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.20.1605251647560.27848@bofh.nohats.ca>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 02:39:08 +0530
Message-ID: <CAKe6YvMAWdqZdmz4p1Vt8rg8aujow6ushtg30K2HvdneK4hw6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
From: Vinayak Hegde <vinayakh@gmail.com>
To: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/6ZoS4fpdrhQezi4wlhNgQVPJ92k>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <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: Wed, 25 May 2016 21:09:12 -0000

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 2:27 AM, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> wrote:
> I have been thinking about this. If we would meet in Dubai, then I would
> not go because I'm an atheist which is a crime there and I don't feel
> secure enough this is a "legacy law not enforced". However, I would not
> be against the IETF meeting there because I do want us to try and be
> inclusive of the Middle East, something we haven't done well so far.
>
> However, I would hope we continue to strife to go to locations that are
> as inclusive as possible. Which includes skipping the US if Mr. Trump
> gets his no-Muslim rule enforced - as a practical statement, not a
> political one.

A thought experiment. Imagine a Trump-like figure in Indonesia
targeting Christians/Atheists/Non-muslims with elections in November.
Assume a meeting is scheduled there in March 2017. How many people
would feel comfortable going there ?

Now imagine the same situation in US if Trump gets elected (an actual
possibility). I see we have a meeting upcoming in Chicago in March
2017. Made up your mind yet ?

-- Vinayak