SE Asia is painful for many, why has it become a preferred destination?

Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org> Sun, 16 February 2020 16:58 UTC

Return-Path: <chopps@chopps.org>
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 376BA120091 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Feb 2020 08:58:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 XV69QABg160r for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Feb 2020 08:58:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.chopps.org (smtp.chopps.org [54.88.81.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 643C712001B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Feb 2020 08:58:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stubbs.int.chopps.org (047-050-069-038.biz.spectrum.com [47.50.69.38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by smtp.chopps.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DEFAF60B5D; Sun, 16 Feb 2020 16:58:14 +0000 (UTC)
From: Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.40.2.2.4\))
Subject: SE Asia is painful for many, why has it become a preferred destination?
Message-Id: <3869E79C-7AA9-45A4-B63D-A5134FF7A4B3@chopps.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 11:58:13 -0500
To: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.40.2.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/V-QE2tGQ3Fdt5EXDsoYVWn3OuSg>
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: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 16:58:17 -0000

I've read the mtgvenue drafts and they seem to indicate that travel pain should be minimized as much as possible.

With IETF 109 we will have chosen SE Asia as a destination for the Asia part of 1-1-1 policy for 4 years running. Also troubling there's a pattern of SIN BKK SIN BKK developing.

The *fastest* flights I can find to BKK involve 24h hours of air travel (airplanes and too short layovers for this type of travel). It is incredibly painful to spend 24-30 hours  in airplanes and airports. At least for me (A non-west coast NA based participant) SE Asia is maximizing pain.

Japan and Korea both seems to be 1/3 less travel for much of NA, and also seemingly no worse or not as bad for much of Europe.

Could the powers that be please consider changing the SIN,BKK,SIN,... pattern to NRT,ICN,NRT,... or at *minimum* mixing more NRT or ICN in there?

I think this would benefit a large percentage of IETF participants w/o adding undue pain elsewhere.

Thanks,
Chris.