IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IETF 107 Vancouver In-Person Meeting Cancelled

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Tue, 10 March 2020 21:14 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.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 DDA093A0D83 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:14:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com
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 btkQfZ7Bicl8 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:14:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::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 C379B3A0D7E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:14:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050096.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02ALEeZP016691; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 21:14:40 GMT
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=hqM27oHsjZUJmCD/j35PQCa2+YFTKAebQH6IOx0ZNSE=; b=HiT4yrzLCNzvHdfEcTtuyXqBGFADBlwNwfN3oPt65L6pRhvccRlox/fJjTPtt1iZEq68 ewtVrMJXOd1FIiaZqOqNK5a7OfGzCCn5xJBj8dj3hza06T2PQCh//bc6z3EJzCOu3Inh sstcqrAhO+fHFi4txhaP+gDEEmik8PucfCBrlc4owTopEenxsMdt/533W0X08mgNQLb5 lbBVwv+c27OhrGS/FQLptbH0D4M6cEJtbMxRM309siIc2zXQM7aVLjenKLQaNoU6kJnm hTgSHk0SOD7tFKZG8eRgiJAj5Rt1zCFCM7HAnUULupn4grGQ8BhKQhm6+5xf88R3hMAA QQ==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint8 (prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com [96.6.114.122] (may be forged)) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2ym4wenwht-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 21:14:40 +0000
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02AL2cSu024779; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:14:39 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.31]) by prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2ym7u1ysdk-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:14:39 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb2.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:14:37 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:14:37 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
CC: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: IETF 107 Vancouver In-Person Meeting Cancelled
Thread-Topic: IETF 107 Vancouver In-Person Meeting Cancelled
Thread-Index: AQHV9w+cSEytLnerpECYUlkjcb5PEahCM/uAgABIbwD//72nAIAAGZ6A
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 21:14:36 +0000
Message-ID: <26D6D036-C676-4E93-8063-EF7EFA5E8016@akamai.com>
References: <158386742797.16091.1025684270011519738@ietfa.amsl.com> <52EE5E3F-E83A-4F81-8F48-6B94AB0A5C7D@akamai.com> <4B6380B9-CBBB-4275-BDA6-F086D66D6DBA@cooperw.in> <A893CAF9-B9B3-4E1A-9D09-0EEEE996E635@akamai.com>
In-Reply-To: <A893CAF9-B9B3-4E1A-9D09-0EEEE996E635@akamai.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.65.236]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <EF99F50F8AC2EB44A4FA8EF880330737@akamai.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-10_15:2020-03-10, 2020-03-10 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=893 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002050000 definitions=main-2003100125
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-10_15:2020-03-10, 2020-03-10 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=862 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2001150001 definitions=main-2003100127
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/TXLU7SO5aTW8BvjsW2Oqk4p50fY>
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: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 21:14:45 -0000

Because some mis-understood my request for info as questioning the decision, let me be explicit: I think they made the right decision.

On 3/10/20, 3:42 PM, "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> wrote:

    >    The IESG and the IRTF Chair have been assessing the viability of the in-person meeting based on the community’s ability to be productive. Assessment of health concerns has been the job of the LLC, on a separate track. 
      
    Could the LLC have cancelled the meeting?  How separate were the tracks?  The IESG didn't consider health concerns at all?
    
    To put it in common business terms, I think we're owed a root cause analysis of the full decision-making process by all parties.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email