Re: [Ietf108planning] Registration open for IETF 108

Michael Thomas <> Thu, 11 June 2020 19:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF6393A00AD for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:12:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.649
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, LOTS_OF_MONEY=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mFPiWZw9tyyx for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::634]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7DAD33A0061 for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id n9so2695112plk.1 for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=tPAQ7Jv127fDBsBZ1QWZkjGJ/dP7v19RQ7fJe5Y+bsw=; b=nVSYois+rHmbXKwNr/bRypKBvcERgokfAkIXNpAG2lrpvns1p9xgmdudfEHpBqn2HL hqH0FTd5W+0+XIM2EMmdQKRcApBb+VYmnwD6/Th5QoO+5BhgawgVAKSYxaZyZOEfTbAQ +BbAW6MRL6NKcW9hWuvL7jtNRLrFam9DfALPByNcYFXr1kW0+Qu7FI2nWSwvetR1C7HO YRn5vA4wEGeJnuIArMFRhUHOHjSHIHIDVMy5VtMVEN3c/9u00GovmxxDjYKtMkM+D6D7 GceVj4aeEa/3x+hPMUdbavfRPCs2x//keWaGhb4riklmad4WlT8H1eapvdZbgkO/UZbO Yf4w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=tPAQ7Jv127fDBsBZ1QWZkjGJ/dP7v19RQ7fJe5Y+bsw=; b=O6Mpfh5LzBvG9M0/V5wakCN/5H4DCEbH5bvJNQd1lH5KV51E5jl8x45uG4IahZpFoz aFZfxOCddfVX/GIjSRZdG9PjA0eigagUoptK0OaF5Te7XzPBFNFhfxnV2I3M1Bx2Y4n4 wJ2TPjACCNAxMymlqHRQZGFuioLzpXW1hEgUAEhf19BG+paunVGm6w5JTlxUWU5MTbKU w9uJvOlEB8G3A1m5vIpUtpJ+jiIz2e9y33F85Bfmtb+OayaC8TuSDtGly15CDcnx/mEr 9bX5f3BczNCx/qoW/F9KMFiiNKLNQtgVEJGCXVhicZiWeCJR01xJR73+pUg18hAvTI82 OR0A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533kV5hQpHwREU25cMqPFg9y+Uo/lVSVEfgN6RLEsFWkIujx7FuA eHdNho6cew6yCdNzFIk/DQGgiIPwtxg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzZxFd+Gxu0ORcLfHQzjbGQKQ3kXJCBbqEWK2ziANjfpg0V89ucUQ94LDPZ+ZmUuoZTkNEDUg==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:1308:: with SMTP id h8mr10145906pja.22.1591902772947; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:12:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MichaelsMacBook.lan ( []) by with ESMTPSA id 140sm3806456pfy.95.2020. for <> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:12:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Ietf108planning] Registration open for IETF 108
References: <> <> <> <5FCC8656386268B41681E1DE@PSB> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Michael Thomas <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:12:50 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 19:12:56 -0000

On 6/11/20 12:07 PM, Russ Housley wrote:
>> On Jun 11, 2020, at 2:42 PM, STARK, BARBARA H <> wrote:
>>> If the fee waiver programme were uncapped then would you still regard that as a bandaid?
>>> Jay
>> I'm going to reply at this point in the thread with some thoughts I haven't seen expressed yet.
>> Much of the commentary against registration fees has come from or on behalf of people who struggle to pay the fees.
>> Much of the commentary for registration fees has come from people who do not struggle to pay the fees.
>> As someone who doesn't struggle to pay the fee (because my employer finds it a significant savings over what would have been paid), but who recognizes that others do struggle, what I would have preferred would be:
>> Put a statement on the registration page:
>> IETF needs to raise $515,145 to pay for costs that would normally have been covered by in-person registration fees. See for more details. We request that those who are able to pay the fees do so. Any who are not able, please simply check the "waiver request" box. You will then be able to register for free. If your company would like to help sponsor our experiment with unlimited waivers (to enable IETF to continue allowing all to contribute, regardless of situation) , please contact us at <email>.
>> And then have unlimited and automatic waiver.
>> IETF likes to experiment. So we should experiment with a trust model. Trust that only those who need the waiver will request it, and see what happens.
>> Barbara
> I really like this idea.
Not to be a wet blanket but what happens if corpro bean counters find 
out that they can game the system for the cost of a checkbox?