Re: IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input (off-topic)

[Sandoche Balakrichenan <[e-mail]>]

On 24/05/16 21:35, S Moonesamy wrote:
> Hi Sandoche,
>
> I labeled my reply as off-topic as it is not directly related to the
> topic.
Looking at the plethora of issues that has been discussed, i do agree
that Visa issue has become a off-topic :-).
>
> At 06:41 24-05-2016, Sandoche Balakrichenan wrote:
>> But i would like to post a real issue here.
>
> [snip]
>
>> Hence, my suggestion is that IETF should take the visa issue also into
>> account when considering a venue.
>
> Please see Slide 25 at
> https://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/IAOC-Overview-IETF86-Final.pdf
==> If the Visa issue has been seriously taken into consideration by the
IAOC, i think we should never had an IETF in the US. Ask the number of
students/professionals from Asian and Arab Countries, the harrassment
they pass through from the US embassy just to get a Visa.
>   I don't know how the visa issue is handled in practice as I am not
> an IAOC member.
>
==> I am not here to complain. But, just wanted to point out that the
community that i previously mentioned has learned to adjust and accepted
it as a way of life. If the IAOC has to consider all participants issues
before considering a venue, then  i think it will be difficult to find
one in our planet.

Sandoche.