Re: [Mtgvenue] editor's take on draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process

Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com> Mon, 23 April 2018 15:45 UTC

Return-Path: <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.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 F31521205D3; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:45:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 IQJntMMelhy6; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:45:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22c.google.com (mail-lf0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0A5112702E; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:45:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id y15-v6so7576317lfj.0; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:45:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=j1n9BgTykQ+TrtE9+oFGNwlosBNy9axpjLRJaA5awx4=; b=gvoxlzyPbZ0M0zPT5b9ZuRN7WolBp78sAqgE5g1Sxmcg/z7oVsTTdit9QQcrtMjZSJ JfxmrmG/K4Y3x8pf39mhCc3cyVS8AGRsYYmOE69QFA/da0ebkgMfFqGkXaLLhqGQGTeP FOZ3zcmtP779DKF+B95abG2FLF5W0lZ7AI5Iyp1OHtuP420dO0XKLugQtwcOjmuhxCfA dMuuf8wDkThAH7OiT1AeprsLRSWXy1ME9fK9O9z1lU5/jiS+yJMic58SS0/4iCerqrxS ISbTj8U6P93Js/T+bbMyTjUY5LUeo70Zz2s4yJdFiN99N5ihtfCG+RsX5eSoEdM//vDl gJOw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=j1n9BgTykQ+TrtE9+oFGNwlosBNy9axpjLRJaA5awx4=; b=SvRmgkxEEI+L0UGaYrs395rU3U9jeTUSxjDVKxuvYsoO6FGOlMLzV4TV4QFsdd6s/H gAurLJnkdjzDmzSiIDCeLqS1ruRcrUPB/7O2Y+0H/05H2H+Ki5KVr+X58HaMj6M3GRTD 6cidNsgWNlLS91DN1TQNw+PrP9/iFzzKhKPN9Kp9wKK5wIYPxgcHHe/OE56Z0fc3JeMM ACV0MTxuGmmxHc/A1nk3bQthNptlAihj1pn3AKQqR1gIcI/te9iJ95sxukm0C5uqfdBJ Bjpzb6dAQw/GpvhjEwKZ8p0VQm21Zmoe0GJ0dwUT46NcIOwsKa3uzKis/vNf9l5DeuFR Mj4Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tAyS9ohQxFlL18JdwjPTchOAGdOv5uHmf1pJTGtJcro3o3mouZt e8sMdWge79RtCGyLB0sK6UmlU9U/Vv9/sHWozB8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZo8ucjbcWNriUFzGMqMBAQpYItbTkbdZ63CUKyAyt4oe6joi3an+vrfxx3Ie99769ZRSf5oOAhsYW4M5drqoDU=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:1462:: with SMTP id k95-v6mr9634605lfi.23.1524498346933; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:45:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.46.43.66 with HTTP; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:45:46 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <7b2a29c1-51e8-27b9-7944-63093c6e1965@cisco.com>
References: <7b2a29c1-51e8-27b9-7944-63093c6e1965@cisco.com>
From: Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 10:45:46 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHBDyN4UeFP6Fh=gan7aCFMgw7Y4e=ZJjOU6cfdPfq_e2cPZCg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] editor's take on draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Cc: ietf <IETF@ietf.org>, "mtgvenue@ietf.org" <mtgvenue@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006e020c056a85ee41"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Ybg_8eexwXiFUDrRNWMrBs5yz5c>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 15:45:52 -0000

Eliot,

I guess you missed my buried post:
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg107499.html

My suggestion is that if we are including anything about no smoking, I
would certainly hope we'd be concerned about the impact on air quality from
mold.  It's not uncommon to find commercial buildings with water damaged
acoustic ceiling tiles.  And, if you see water damage on the room facing
side, then you certainly will have more on the ceiling facing side.  In the
case of Singapore those tiles were sagging.  Molds love acoustic ceiling
tiles.   And, given my reaction, they likely had Aspergillus mold growing
on them. Aspergillus produces Ochratoxin A which has many known negative
health impacts.  Molds like this can cause respiratory issues even in
healthy individuals.  I'm happy to point to research documenting these
impacts. Interestingly, research shows that mycotoxins found in tobacco are
also a factor in the health impacts of cigarette smoking.

And, while one might think I was the only one impacted in Singapore, 25%
of the population has the predisposition to be made ill.  Beyond
respiratory impacts, there are many other non-specific symptoms that could
easily be attributed to other causes.  For example, people might have
attributed symptoms to other causes such as the flu and the exposure will
increase the risk of getting the flu and other respiratory illnesses.
Anyone that finds they are getting sicker more frequently since Singapore
might consider this as a factor.  The impact is additive over time and each
subsequent exposure results in a more intense reaction sooner.   Here's an
article indicating that up to 50% of illnesses are due to mold exposure:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3654247/

Regards,
Mary.

On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> wrote:

> There are currently five additional requirements under consideration:
>
>    1. No smoking - Proposed Section 3.1
>    2. Gender-neutral rest rooms - Proposed Section 3.3
>    3. Child care facilities - Proposed Section 3.3
>    4. Conflicts regarding people with special needs or disabilities ???
>    5. Budget hotels - Already present in Section 3.2
>
>
> At the moment there is proposed text for (1) and (3).  I do not have text
> for (2) or (4) yet.  I believe Pete asked for feedback from the IAOC on (2)
> in particular, and I have questions regarding what to write on (4).  It
> seems we are zooming in on closing the last point (5) with no changes.
>
> Eliot
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mtgvenue mailing list
> Mtgvenue@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue
>
>