Re: bits-n-bites: Exhibitors and product vendors hawking wares at anIETF meeting?

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 04 July 2012 18:49 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
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 2204021F8790 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Jul 2012 11:49:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -111.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-111.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.093, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PPPkqxqgM6hI for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Jul 2012 11:49:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30E3F21F8787 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Jul 2012 11:49:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 43202 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2012 18:49:55 -0000
Received: from leila.iecc.com (64.57.183.34) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 4 Jul 2012 18:49:55 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:vbr-info; s=4ff49053.xn--i8sz2z.k1207; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=xkfclF62GoRB4x/0ynHHRLHXs07Lf+i3m+pTueHNPVI=; b=UmAaHWFDyqJX8kPZDE3G1MrPU4ukoNPnFG0kO45PSyalWUU4wwsFDLDNQ9c/0FPqNdHgOJdYRBzUl2z41elNchIUUrZlHI3Qvm+/oulNfpNFuq9nFr8HwuZPASYqkIlfNJxRG1xiZM10h2HXYTYHaZwLYLW0ME7RFaDyEpzJC6g=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:vbr-info; s=4ff49053.xn--i8sz2z.k1207; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=xkfclF62GoRB4x/0ynHHRLHXs07Lf+i3m+pTueHNPVI=; b=R7IregR3lw8wOa8IBTG7eoGUSLmHRI12tq46YuPTFYj2Hu5XMOx3u7N/Y66esZ+6IkZouLWFpHuVp+fYaK5v51n9t72cedy5cKu9d5mFabOq34wmTQFQdNd76rDLRS8Nx9ijkTNuUfMJZSbZr6d+e5aOP0jVbudT99KC0YV6iiI=
VBR-Info: md=iecc.com; mc=all; mv=dwl.spamhaus.org
Date: 4 Jul 2012 18:49:33 -0000
Message-ID: <20120704184933.79868.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: bits-n-bites: Exhibitors and product vendors hawking wares at anIETF meeting?
In-Reply-To: <4FF44CA9.10702@bogus.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
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: Wed, 04 Jul 2012 18:49:46 -0000

>NANOG is around 500 attendees. I daresay exposure to the average nanog
>attendee is worth more, but ultimately the best feedback in that regard
>will likely come from the sponsors.

IETF is bigger, but on the other hand, IETF attendees probably spend
less per capita on equipment than NANOGers do.

It's an experiment, if we're turning away sponsors and people think it
was overall a success, we can raise the price.  If not, well, we can
do something else.

R's,
John