IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IETF 107 and Corona Virus?

Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> Thu, 13 February 2020 20:50 UTC

Return-Path: <rlb@ipv.sx>
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 0A42212026E for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 12:50:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ipv-sx.20150623.gappssmtp.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 iNERc8PpJ0zg for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 12:50:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qv1-xf36.google.com (mail-qv1-xf36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f36]) (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 BE450120096 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 12:50:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qv1-xf36.google.com with SMTP id o18so3292450qvf.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 12:50:45 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ipv-sx.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=CFPGCofoc90e4LoqkUkGXu+pgRs4HgiK/tDRF91AF1Q=; b=J0xngPec25oa++VaA6A/QddSIE+4lnomlNsCt+16Cq3xcz9qyeO4TcNIZjlt6l1YFe 4PnN6tbXO3+ebWgKES6Y/rJA2I33n1zkbBuqavlxqmNUkQANBXTIwjTlGCyztO2pC7yT AZzEhQd1caSnmyA38LydRI1urOumrW99J8j0PA98F9phJlp0YsEq+AwZLd2V8zGbN4rJ okCy/bNzkzv8KMmcEZHzJiqo8NsOi8sy2TWN/FDeLMH7nodb2pg240gHCJL9b5ryDQmx wcDTAU6pVy0xBeeMs5IsbE08LvHCLdRkd+Azp54JXyYmJtXH2u+8KHw8TrNRyaBmKXGY 4KjA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=CFPGCofoc90e4LoqkUkGXu+pgRs4HgiK/tDRF91AF1Q=; b=uHSO5waVWGC9syKBk1DLmOev42cEAPAUgK9wVDH+DaWSknfw9/SZdXtyh8Jx7fJCxg 7LRVSy7RuhN7knPJ70bwq6hdqyQXn+LqDOxqH5JOgOcTwYy9kdzNqGJbnw6M0WPgGk+m hFVsUhTqf+KO0Os13z5tXa61MMeyobBYEZgBZ2yUZRIftt5QLhgJgprM8oKEiV4i53FT 0o1J6F6U3s6DBLkILNOQmx2B4cAlT3hzYaQvByViY8UPjxVRfpWPjmXTcE/BHaqK3nbo WSwEl+4v17TXwLohxrDRFfOood1oyIWmbRKkPvAKtpsAGpnsbNl/G0tlBWnPQlkwC5Eh i06g==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW0t2Zzcp/dEWM+gmgEEWkogolC+hRMEeya0/NG+zGTWOaJ+3ap LrUoZUFVDzLnsjqpdNkCoPUkdJli/l7IzuKTufXHDw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyc7G9glmoqq8wxoBomcgbXUuouweanzewrUS29Mb+NUXiCmkuPnfH5O8efwKuQH80kEOv8KH0UqZ5HQajDqIs=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:1494:: with SMTP id bn20mr13462729qvb.43.1581627044491; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 12:50:44 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <VE1PR03MB54220BB50CB38B6F4A72FC58EE1A0@VE1PR03MB5422.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <eb39f2cd-7a27-e0ff-3be4-6d03d13f31b8@gmail.com> <DACFBEF8-93A6-429C-AF16-19E01A0BEA50@consulintel.es> <CAHbuEH42ZYRZfjVTSnAHnBaVM+9M1Bt843U37F+2Y97Sdx1iQg@mail.gmail.com> <6E1C07A9-AF8A-4ACD-A299-E7D0E757F8C4@tzi.org> <CAHbuEH5Z0TAdj1Y4UUArsLv1M6JHAqqdm27f-MD3rJXKWbGU9w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHbuEH5Z0TAdj1Y4UUArsLv1M6JHAqqdm27f-MD3rJXKWbGU9w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:50:31 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL02cgRMG=NL+VGfGhyO8nm+UGq1zdscB_-CRTMXmDg7-j36pQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: IETF 107 and Corona Virus?
To: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000278a9c059e7b3eaf"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/NK2FGvClvv3WKRUU3cNg_fNqMsY>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 20:50:48 -0000

On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 3:37 PM Kathleen Moriarty <
kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Carsten,
>
> There's one consideration you left out -
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 3:18 PM Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
>
>> On 2020-02-13, at 15:55, Kathleen Moriarty <
>> Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > That said, my travel is mostly booked and I am planning to attend, but
>> will watch to see what happens with any IETF pandemic planning.
>>
>> Which is what is probably true for most of us.
>>
>> We already know that companies’ and countries’ policies will place some
>> limitations on the meeting (which actually is having some limited impact on
>> planning for the meeting).  With the knowledge we have today (2020-02-13),
>> we can assume that we will have a productive meeting, not the least because
>> we have good remote attendance possibilities for those who can’t (or choose
>> not to) make it.
>>
>> On a health/responsibility level (and, again with the knowledge of
>> today), there simply is no reason to cancel the meeting.  It is still way
>> more likely for an IETF attendee to have a traffic accident than to be
>> impacted by COVID-19.
>>
>
> Individuals from an entire nation likely cannot attend what is meant to be
> a global meeting. This deserves some thought.
>

I agree that this is unfortunate, but I don't see how it follows from this
that nobody else should meet.

--Richard




>
> Best regards,
> Kathleen
>
>>
>> Now that knowledge we have today may change (a.k.a. “surprises”), so the
>> IETF leadership needs to stay in a position to make different decisions
>> based on emerging situations, and new expert advice that may become
>> available.
>>
>> I still think of the plenary where it was announced that we would meet in
>> Korea and somebody went to the microphone with the concern that North Korea
>> could be attacking Seoul at any time.  Yes, COVID-19 can attack at any
>> time, but it is just one of many risks that we have to juggle.
>>
>> Grüße, Carsten
>>
>>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
> Kathleen
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email