RE: IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input

["MH Michael Hammer (5304)" <[e-mail]>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Eliot Lear
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 4:50 PM
> To: Melinda Shore; Ted Lemon
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for
> input
> 
> 
> 
> On 5/25/16 10:44 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
> > On 5/25/16 12:36 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> >> It's probably easier to enumerate who's excluded than who's included:
> >
> > No, it's still not really working.
> >
> > Would we, for example, be willing to meet in a place that criminalizes
> > Muslims or Jews or Hindus?  I sincerely hope not, and I don't think
> > that we would.
> 
> Criminalizes?  Probably not.  Makes it difficult for them to adhere to the
> precepts of their religion?  We've already done that (perhaps some of it is
> unavoidable, by the way).
> 
> Eliot
> 

I've been following the conversation with interest but haven't commented up to this point because I normally don't attend IETF meetings except through jabber. I normally only participate in the working groups dealing with email authentication and can't justify attending in person. 

I had been thinking that about the only venue that might be neutral would be Switzerland but then I read Melinda's  comment and coincidentally saw this article - http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/05/25/swiss-authorities-overule-teacher-handshake-ban/84899900/.  With that I think I'll go back to lurking.

Mike