On IETF hubs

"Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Sun, 26 May 2019 14:24 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.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 2EB7D1200A4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 May 2019 07:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 b9o1Thg8zcpX for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 May 2019 07:24:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (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 6CACE120043 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 May 2019 07:24:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [169.254.131.57] (50-1-99-176.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.176]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x4QEMduQ014660 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 May 2019 07:22:40 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-99-176.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.176] claimed to be [169.254.131.57]
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
To: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: On IETF hubs
Date: Sun, 26 May 2019 07:24:38 -0700
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.12.4r5594)
Message-ID: <C7F6E853-11CD-4499-87CD-4C875F0CC416@vpnc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/_s-hudBhg_sw3PsZlaLD_cfP_Ro>
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, 26 May 2019 14:24:43 -0000

On 26 May 2019, at 1:54, Loganaden Velvindron wrote:

> We've been contributed patches for TLS 1.3, IPv6, DNS, http451 in open
> source
> projects during the IETF hackathons. We're also working on a few 
> drafts. We
> have a lot
> of high school and university students among ourselves.
>
> We're OK with paying the registration fees provided that they are
> reasonable.
>
> There are countries such as Madagascar who are trying to organize 
> their own
> IETF
> hubs but their Cost of living is lower than us. What is reasonable to 
> us
> might be expensive
> to them.
>
> Could there be a remote registration fee calculated per country ?

The still-nascent idea of IETF hubs has not gotten enough attention 
here. A remote participant who is at a physical hub during IETF week, 
even if only intermittently for a few WG meetings, is probably on 
average more valuable than someone who is headsetted in their office or 
living room. It would be great to encourage hubs more. For example, if 
the IETF is to charge (even a little) for remote participation, it could 
maybe charge less for people who are attending in hubs.

--Paul Hoffman