Re: Registration details for IETF 108

"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Sun, 31 May 2020 21:24 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.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 F133C3A0DBE for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 May 2020 14:24:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.125
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.125 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DEAR_SOMETHING=1.973, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.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 3TIyKb7zQiII for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 May 2020 14:24:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from maila2.tigertech.net (maila2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.152]) (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 04F473A0DBD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 May 2020 14:24:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49ZrsS6bGsz6G88X; Sun, 31 May 2020 14:24:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1590960252; bh=OQdYo9adFT6WWqLkGUG4T9xylzVCP97UMNyAj7ONok8=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=AE29pN0npV5gyR9UGiAhYoc45IaPguArLWsLX2IiHp5eduzIWjA5sV0SHQJjtBqxh SWSxrtI4i/pnTPlOS2xKVoWX8+GxwIbul4qBT4oGaB7OLtMFYjB+wt00WiQlvvbhaZ MEJbYWn9O/gellXuhJtUpBlceYqAiJrRSUyspV7o=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at a2.tigertech.net
Received: from [192.168.128.43] (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 49ZrsQ6kZLz6G9Z9; Sun, 31 May 2020 14:24:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Registration details for IETF 108
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <159062833754.6110.5826748635235943562@ietfa.amsl.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20200531121457.0b249858@elandnews.com> <CABcZeBOzVHaSZa0A3eDz12RwNuCiHtiJL8wqvAhhLPN6YEQOkQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <3f9a0e50-c01b-01c6-ad52-95f370baeb8d@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Sun, 31 May 2020 17:24:10 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBOzVHaSZa0A3eDz12RwNuCiHtiJL8wqvAhhLPN6YEQOkQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/X2aZaMijOcfntZCJ1fKZWmvN9iM>
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, 31 May 2020 21:24:14 -0000

I agree with Eric in his description.  From where I sit, this seems a 
reasonable decision by the leadership.

Yours,
Joel

On 5/31/2020 5:13 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 1:56 PM S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com 
> <mailto:sm%2Bietf@elandsys.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Dear Internet Engineering Steering Group,
> 
>     [Reply-To override]
> 
>     At 06:12 PM 27-05-2020, IETF Executive Director wrote:
>      >This meeting will have a substantial agenda but as the cost of an
>      >online meeting is lower, the registration fees have been set at
>      >approximately one-third of those for an in-person meeting.  A
>      >detailed explanation of why we charge a fee for meetings and how the
>      >fee reduction was set for IETF 108 is provided in a separate blog
>     post [3].
> 
>     In 2013, the IETF Chair affirmed that the Internet Engineering Task
>     Force embraced the modern paradigm for standards.  One of the points
>     in the document is the standards process being open to all interested
>     and informed parties.  If I recall correctly, I raised a point a few
>     months before 2013 about the IETF allowing free access to its
>     meetings through the Internet.  I could not help noticing that there
>     is now a required fee to access the next IETF meeting.  Was that
>     approved by the IESG?
> 
>     I took a look at the meeting policy for the IETF.  I never understood
>     why that policy is described as an ambition.  Anyway, as that policy
>     does not specify anything about changing the existing practice for
>     fees, it is unlikely that the decision to charge for online meetings
>     can be challenged.
> 
>     I would like to thank the IETF LLC Directors for acknowledging that
>     the fee presents a barrier to participation and their charitable
>     offer.  I'll leave the charitable offer to those who are in need.
> 
>     It took a decade for the IETF to take this pay-to-play decision.  Was
>     there any discussion about it?
> 
> 
> I don't think the characterization of this as "pay-to-play" is accurate. You
> are certainly free to participate in mailing lists, github, etc.
> 
> What is being charged here is a fee to participate [0] in real-time virtual
> meetings, just as there is one charged for attending in-person meetings.
> 
> -Ekr
> 
> [0] I emphasize "real-time" as I expect that the recordings will be 
> available
> after the fact as usual.
> 
>