Re: Badges and blue sheets

Tobias Gondrom <> Fri, 12 November 2010 03:01 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F218328C105 for <>; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 19:01:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -94.925
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-94.925 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.437, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d8uuidggTSR6 for <>; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 19:01:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7BD33A6915 for <>; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 19:01:35 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default;; b=mR1tyDH03kKW1DTs3EVIjd50NyW4klJiyGYp/DnjY6dyv5RoSo6JsyakI+k9JphyXIwFj6mfJ5MU8aenAgYW9nier2yjnN82a0k+ZyUcfEP3wAivGq4ez0m+Glo1AUzR; h=Received:Received:Cc:Message-Id:From:To:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Subject:Mime-Version:Date:References:X-Mailer;
Received: (qmail 1796 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2010 04:01:44 +0100
Received: from (HELO ? ( by with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 12 Nov 2010 04:01:43 +0100
Message-Id: <>
From: Tobias Gondrom <>
To: Brian E Carpenter <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: Badges and blue sheets
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 7B500)
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 02:55:27 +0000
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (7B500)
Cc: "" <>, IETF discussion list <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 03:01:37 -0000

Personally I am ok with the badge checking (as form of access control to a non-public resource (meeting, terminal rooms)) but I can understand some of related questions regarding who modifies ietf operation.

Regarding freeriders: agree that would be a big deal. But I am not aware of any incident of that. So I would like to hear more about such incidents and extend (even anecdotal) before considering anything for this reason. 

For bluesheets automation: Didn't we have the RFID experiment in Hiroshima Unfortunately at that time with dual blue sheet and rfid. To replace by rfid may still be a way. But thinking about both methods: if a person wants to avoid blue sheets either method he could do that without detection. And even easier: we have all slides, audio stream and jabber online available, is the blue sheet really still helpful regarding patent trolls?



On 12 Nov 2010, at 00:09, Brian E Carpenter <> wrote:

> On 2010-11-12 12:32, Lawrence Conroy wrote:
> ...
>> Do I think the introduction of badge police to control access to IETF
>> WG meetings is a big deal? 
> I think that freeriders attending our meetings without paying their
> share of costs would be a big deal.
> I think that patent trolls attending our meetings without identifying
> themselves and signing the blue sheets would be a big deal.
> I am very happy to have my badge checked and I would be even happier
> if the blue sheets could be automated.
>    Brian
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list