Re: Concerns about Singapore

Andrew Allen <> Sun, 10 April 2016 06:36 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4292A12D124 for <>; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 23:36:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.616
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.616 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7sQe4ms3LiyS for <>; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 23:36:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1950C12D0AB for <>; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 23:36:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 10 Apr 2016 04:08:54 -0400
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 02:36:07 -0400
Received: from ([fe80::28c6:fa1c:91c6:2e23]) by ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0210.002; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 02:36:07 -0400
From: Andrew Allen <>
To: Yoav Nir <>
Subject: Re: Concerns about Singapore
Thread-Topic: Concerns about Singapore
Thread-Index: AQHRkOMNjufwcA4TvkK+5mik25hZRp9/GCcAgAAATwCAAAuKAIAACE6AgAAKzACAAtn2AIAAFwKAgACcreg=
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 06:36:06 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>, <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-CA, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2016041006360362833484488910575blackberrycom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Cc: " Discussion" <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 06:36:12 -0000

That's why I proposed that IETF check with the hotels that this isn't going to be an issue. The other potential issue I foresee which needs checking with the authorities is if there will be a problem with customs and immigration forms with questions regarding marital status and number of family members traveling with you.

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
From: Yoav Nir
Sent: Saturday, April 9, 2016 18:15
To: Andrew Allen
Cc: David Conrad; Dhruv Dhody; Discussion
Subject: Re: Concerns about Singapore

Hi, Andrew

I don't think the IETF should boycott locations just because the community doesn't like some of the laws of that country or aspects of that countries governments policies‎.  That is a very slippery slope that could significantly reduce the number of possible meeting locations and also distract from the IETF mission.

I generally agree with this. However:

Having been to Singapore once before I am certain there are no room police patrolling the hotel corridors trying to ascertain what activities the guests are up to in their own rooms. There were also no personal questions asked at hotel registration as far as I recall ( I am sure I would have remembered that) so I don't see it as an especially hostile environment.‎ I think the IETF should confirm with the meeting hotels that there will be no issues in that regard and also a check with the Singapore authorities that there will be no threat to IETF participants because of their orientation or marital status would be a sensible measure.

I’m sure they didn’t ask *you* any questions. But you might have gotten some response if you tried to check in with another man into a room that had just one bed.  I’m not saying that you would. I don’t know, having never been in Singapore, but I can understand that it would be a concern.