Re: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Sun, 29 January 2017 19:53 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 BE07A1295B8 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 11:53:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199] 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 TWSRTROf204M for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 11:53:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (bsa2.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 909C41295B6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 11:53:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [198.252.137.70] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1cXvXR-0000BQ-1h; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 14:53:25 -0500
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2017 14:53:16 -0500
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: James Seng <james.seng@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100
Message-ID: <9885A2446F9399C723780E8C@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <CA+ruDEBHyzk5cg5Vmq-anKJTxLkZpHrb9APwkfbDGn6FeFzR_w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160525220818.18333.71186.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <700D9CB7-4EFD-459B-AA12-133A6BB04E90@senki.org> <1C8639E6-1058-4D04-84ED-0C354E6567D1@cisco.com> <9CBABA69-1814-4676-9C69-E129F04AD24C@cisco.com> <5DFDEA43-8156-491D-A300-2BCED1AED1A4@gmail.com> <5747909C.20403@si6networks.com> <955df2106aa2e12cefbd450be022e779.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <D36D49EE.35116%jefft0@remap.ucla.edu> <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B05266663BF@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com> <CA+ruDECdMAC2PQqibqQijc-nLHUxOGw0h-ZYyh8FnZZaeZ8sTA@mail.gmail.c om> <CA+ruDEBHyzk5cg5Vmq-anKJTxLkZpHrb9APwkfbDGn6FeFzR_w@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.70
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/HIRa9rscw684pM7Mdia8s1tcIKU>
Cc: "Ietf@Ietf. Org" <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: Sun, 29 Jan 2017 19:53:29 -0000

We may need a new supply of the old "multilingual" tee shirts in
Chicago.   Pete, still have the original templates?  :-(

   john

--On Monday, January 30, 2017 03:08 +0800 James Seng
<james.seng@gmail.com> wrote:

> I rescind my previous comment that the scenario I painted is
> rhetorical.
> 
> None of our US fellow IETFers here have any moral authority to
> talk about "inclusive" ever again.
> 
> -James Seng
> 
> On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 5:44 AM, James Seng
> <james.seng@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Since after 9-11, things have change a lot for United
>> States[1].
>> 
>> Especially for TSA, I remember going to SFO the first time
>> after 9-11, it took me 2 hours just to clear the security and
>> I missed my flight. I also remember pre 9-11, I could get
>> into US for less than 15-20mins.
>> 
>> Now, for my American friends who pay in the price in time,
>> let me tell you what we non-American citizen has to do to get
>> into US after 9-11. We have been tagged, photographed,
>> fingerprinted, all our 10 fingers every time we have to enter
>> US. We have been systematically profiled, often by racial or
>> nationality, and some of us have to go through enhanced
>> body-to-body search everytime we cross security. I was put in
>> a "Muslim" basket been a Malaysian for a while so ... And we
>> have to do it with a smile because if any of us pull of a
>> stunt like Aaron Tobey[2], we could be denied our entry and
>> possibility forever.
>> 
>> My wife complains that the over the last decade I have put on
>> a lot of weight and asked me to check my photos.
>> Unfortunately, I don't like selfie nor do I like to take
>> pictures of myself. But I told her not to worry as TSA has a
>> complete profile of me becoming fat over the years.
>> 
>> Today, we all saw a US President may-to-be calling up to
>> forbid Muslim to enter US, to build walls to prevent people
>> from the south, who threaten to get even tougher to
>> foreigners.
>> 
>> So by the same principle that Jeff is advocate, that we hold
>> IETF meeting where "law declares some people less valid", I
>> prognosticate we may no longer able to hold our meetings in
>> US.
>> 
>> [1]
>> http://www.ibtimes.com/pulse/united-states-after-911-6-thing
>> s-have-changed-2001-2093156
>> 
>> [2]
>> http://dailylounge.com/the-daily/entry/how-to-fight-the-tsa
>> 
>> ps: This is rhetorical to put any doubt in rest. I love US
>> even though getting there is still a pain for me.
>> 
>> -James Seng
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 9:34 PM, MH Michael Hammer (5304)
>> <MHammer@ag.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>>> > Thompson, Jeff Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 3:55 AM
>>> > To: Dan Harkins
>>> > Cc: recentattendees@ietf.org; Ietf@Ietf. Org
>>> > Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore
>>> > go/no go for IETF 100
>>> > 
>>> > On 2016/5/26, 21:11:51, "Recentattendees on behalf of Dan
>>> > Harkins" <recentattendees-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of
>>> > dharkins@lounge.org> wrote:
>>> > 
>>> > >  I would also like to suggest that the ability of
>>> > >  certain members to bring their family on a vacation
>>> > > that coincides with an IETF should not be a governing
>>> > > factor in venue selection. Many people like to launder a
>>> > > business trip into a family vacation (myself
>>> > > included!) but that's not why the IETF exists and it
>>> > > should have no bearing on where we meet.
>>> > 
>>> > So then, the IETF policy would read ³The IETF may hold
>>> > meetings in
>>> countries
>>> > where the law declares some people less valid. If you are
>>> > such a
>>> person, then
>>> > the IETF recommends that to avoid trouble with the law you
>>> > should hide
>>> who
>>> > you are, including not bringing your family.²
>>> > 
>>> > Is this the organization that the IETF is going to be?
>>> > 
>>> > - Jeff
>>> > 
>>> 
>>> Jeff,
>>> 
>>> Is there any country in the world that meets the standard
>>> your comment implies should be the IETF policy? Is this a
>>> case of perfection being the enemy of good? Perhaps it is a
>>> case of perfection being the enemy of reality. I don't know
>>> what IETF policy should be but I do recognize that there are
>>> very real limitations that constrain choices. I'll also
>>> point out that the choices made will constrain the choices
>>> of participants. I'm not advocating for any particular
>>> choice by the IETF with regard to meeting locations.
>>> 
>>> Mike
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Recentattendees mailing list
>>> Recentattendees@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/recentattendees
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> -James Seng