Re: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria

Jari Arkko wrote:

> Elwyn Davies wrote:
>
>> There is some logic in this.. Participants need to be able to get 
>> from airport to hotel to venue on foot/public transport without 
>> needing to bring excessive personal protection gear that they might 
>> not otherwise own, or experiencing heat stroke because they aren't 
>> used to the temperature/humidity (oh, and touristing before/after 
>> isn't much fun either).
>
>
> Lets just not specify anything here. Its not like the secretariat
> would be blindly executing our rules and ending up selecting
> the Antarctica for the next IETF location. (They wouldn't because
> the hotel capacity is insufficient.) In other places, you can
> probably manage short exposure to the elements, particularly
> if you happen to check beforehand which part of the world you
> are going to. And yes, this might mean investment to protective
> gear such as a hat, jacket or a tube of SPF 40. Or a taxi ride.
>
> And I've found that touristing is more interesting in extreme
> conditions.

You don't want exact rules..but preferring a 'temperate' temperature 
range or avoiding likely real extremes is a criterion for choosing one 
veue over another.

>
>> More importantly, the venue must be able to maintain a sensible 
>> temperature/humidity in the conference rooms (20-23 deg  C, 50% 
>> Relative Humidity). 
>
>
> This is more important. I feel that the rooms are mostly too cold
> (probably tuned for business suits, not t-shirts).

Interesting.. I have not yet found anything cooler than nicely 
comfortable for me - mostly they are far too hot for my taste but 
doubtless that might be something to do with BMI!  Seriously, the 
population of laptops (plus the need for inter-seat spacing to 
accomodate laptop use) may mean that room sizes need to be larger than 
the nominal capacities that venues quote.  It would probably be sensible 
to quote the space per participant that we expect in meeting rooms and 
maybe something about chair layouts.

>
>> Other health risks: Would participants need vaccinations before 
>> attending?  Is it in a malaria risk area?  Are there other infectious 
>> disease hazards or nuisances - e.g., West Nile fever, Lyme disease, 
>> Scottish Highland midges.  Even if visas are not required are there 
>> any health checks at immigration?
>
>
> Its really better that people check with their own doctors about this.
> I at least check before "weird" trips from our local clinique what the
> vaccination recommendations are.

Absolutely, but choosing a venue where most people (e.g.) ought to be 
popping malaria prevention pills is something that needs to be thought 
about.. it means participants need more advance planning and last minute 
decisions might not be possible (as with visas).

>
>> The criteria say nothing about accessibility for the differently able.
>
>
> This should be a requirement.
>
>> Editorial note: You should flag up that continental European 
>> conventions are in use for numbers.
>
>
> What numbers?

e.g., I take it that 1.300 means we average 13e2 rather than 13e-1 
participants.

Regards,
Elwyn

>
> --Jari
>

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf