IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: privacy and IETF meetings in US

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Fri, 07 June 2019 16:42 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 A8F861200DB for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 09:42:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 sVid8lpXnt03 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 09:42:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (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 0111E12009E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 09:42:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45L7bw6qt2zD3m for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 18:42:20 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1559925740; bh=kMcwXSG0fURmWtMqiRucQDQGbTUiKI6YcLzwMvVHKAg=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=YLaKzF8SwDjq3qCC3FAEldXlf+JFq/8Lex4TTp1sur7XvJ8QBQiYDdBltMWIx4YKU OBqqwQxYxfU9H5zfhoGAav4GwuQg56gf6RwbdGhQX2QR3MT9Fw8DvMvJEV39Gcen74 TzSpMAQsN8qNHblXPLsiAm5yYqrPsarwgj1myYQQ=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FON0R-9in2LY for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 18:42:19 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 18:42:18 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9AB2F354D4A; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 12:42:17 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bofh.nohats.ca 9AB2F354D4A
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F37F400094D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 12:42:17 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2019 12:42:17 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: privacy and IETF meetings in US
In-Reply-To: <5f314b9b-d922-8d47-a913-a7e58aef98ec@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1906071237490.13812@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <5B42C40D-50EF-4D56-8661-BFA8FF107426@consulintel.es> <33839E7AE337BD20319D6BF0@PSB> <8989A94D-FDA7-40E3-BE4B-023DA221BD7C@consulintel.es> <5f314b9b-d922-8d47-a913-a7e58aef98ec@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LRH 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/TWrg6W1XoqMy1zLlQeHkmH49878>
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: Fri, 07 Jun 2019 16:42:25 -0000

On Fri, 7 Jun 2019, Melinda Shore wrote:

> IETF 102 was scheduled to be in SF but moved to Montreal.  I
> think it's too soon to know what the situation is going to be
> in 2021.

And if I understood correctly, this planned San Francisco meeting is
happening because of money locked/lost if we don't use it. So we
might just have to do the meeting in the US. And I guess, we will
find out how bad things really are?

I think it would be okay to keep this meeting, and hoping things will
change. I do think it is prudent not to commit any financial resources
to schedule any further meetings in the US for now.

Paul
ps. at least for me, I will already know in my home city of Toronto,
whether or not I will be refused for not handing out my social media
or web browser history, since we clear immigration at the airport :P

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email