Re: Hotel situation

Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> Thu, 17 December 2015 04:56 UTC

Return-Path: <fernando@gont.com.ar>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A15A81A6F91 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Dec 2015 20:56:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 5ZlQuhKNeDrW for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Dec 2015 20:56:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from web01.jbserver.net (web01.jbserver.net [IPv6:2a00:8240:6:a::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 336971A6FC9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Dec 2015 20:56:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.hotelramada.com ([181.198.69.235] helo=[192.168.7.52]) by web01.jbserver.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from <fernando@gont.com.ar>) id 1a9QcC-0001QE-V8; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 05:56:33 +0100
Subject: Re: Hotel situation
To: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <567192F3.9090506@gmail.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630797A09BC1@mbx-03.WIN.NOMINUM.COM> <56719864.8010604@gmail.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Message-ID: <56723EAB.9020606@gont.com.ar>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 01:48:43 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56719864.8010604@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/QI92Ea_YNwxhimdHqAdtOfiklKo>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 17 Dec 2015 04:56:41 -0000

On 12/16/2015 01:59 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
> On 12/16/15 7:52 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
>>> Why are we continuing to have hotel issues meeting after meeting 
>>> after meeting after meeting?
>>
>> Because we can't force hotels to give us large allocations.  
> 
> We already have a list of hotels which will.
> 
> Either meetings are important or they're not.  If we're
> going to continue to treat meeting participation as necessary,
> we need to make it easier logistically.  Instead we keep throwing
> up barriers to participation.  The closest overflow hotel
> is nearly a mile from the Hilton - how's that going to work
> out for people with limited mobility?

Never stayed at that area. But using www.booking.com you can find places
like 600m away from the Hilton (e.g.
<http://www.booking.com/hotel/ar/apartment-terrazas-del-dique.en-gb.html?aid=306395;label=buenos-aires%2Fpuerto-madero-Eelst*LpyP7U16n_myyEqgS25635933629%3Apl%3Ata%3Ap15%3Ap2%3Aac%3Aap1t1%3Aneg%3Afi%3Atikwd-3626240213%3Alp2218%3Ali%3Adec%3Adm;sid=6e7151c730296ad61e349d7d2aa7561d;dcid=1;checkin=2016-04-02;checkout=2016-04-09;dist=0;group_adults=1;group_children=0;no_rooms=1;room1=A;sb_price_type=total;srfid=67563b9f784cbdb5c96168ed26f4ad5e7f3eda09X5;type=total;ucfs=1&>)

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1