IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: travel guide for the next IETF...

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Fri, 04 January 2013 22:53 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
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 8C5F621F86A2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 14:53:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VUcKHsAQG33j for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 14:53:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4A8521F8881 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 14:53:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.80] (unknown [118.209.230.64]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AC82E509B6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 17:53:22 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\))
Subject: Re: travel guide for the next IETF...
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <4613980CFC78314ABFD7F85CC30277210EE27C34@IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com>
Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 09:53:18 +1100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2C17B081-ECE7-4CD0-99AB-72324EA0BE27@mnot.net>
References: <50DF09C7.1060009@dcrocker.net> <20200.1356985377@sandelman.ca> <4613980CFC78314ABFD7F85CC30277210EE27C34@IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com>
To: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499)
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 04 Jan 2013 22:53:24 -0000

If the powers that be want to encourage us to come for the entire week, choosing places like this doesn't help. I don't need a tourist paradise, but I don't want to eat from the same hotel restaurant six days in a row. And needing a car is absurd. 

</grumble>

P.S. I wonder how the "Stand Your Ground" laws will be interpreted by IETF participants... perhaps our discussions will be extra-civil this time. At least they're recorded...



On 05/01/2013, at 9:14 AM, Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com> wrote:

> 
> On Dec 31, 2012, at 10:22 PM, Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca> wrote:
> 
>> 
>>>>>>> "Dave" == Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> writes:
>>   Dave> "Quick, name five reasons to go to Orlando. Here are mine:
>>   Dave> Puerto Rican 
>>   Dave> delicacies, alternative cinema, craft beer, African-American
>>   Dave> history and 
>>   Dave> psychic readings..."
>> 
>> Good... but how to get there?
>> 
>> We appear to be stuck in the middle of a monster hotel with a single
>> boulevard and nothing at all nearby (except that there is a shuttle
>> to Disney)
>> 
>> Shoping around for places to stay, there are some 3-star places for
>> <$50/night.   
> 
> Looking in Google Earth, you'll still need a car. Even with those hotels that are within walking distance, there are big stretches of road without any sidewalks.

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email