Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! ... vetting of alternatives
David Morris <dwm@xpasc.com> Fri, 17 August 2012 23:58 UTC
Return-Path: <dwm@xpasc.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 CAF6621F8435; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.261
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.261 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-3.954, BAYES_00=-2.599, MISSING_HEADERS=1.292]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XqP9CoIMEd7d; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c2w3p-2.abacamail.com (c2w3p-2.abacamail.com [209.133.53.32]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FA0D21F8432; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xpasc.com (unknown [68.164.244.188]) by c2w3p-2.abacamail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBA7440779; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 23:58:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from egate.xpasc.com (egate.xpasc.com [10.1.2.49]) by xpasc.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q7HNw4Ix031631; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:58:04 -0700
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:58:04 -0700
From: David Morris <dwm@xpasc.com>
Subject: Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! ... vetting of alternatives
In-Reply-To: <502E9DC3.2020807@bogus.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.01.1208171513050.25946@egate.xpasc.com>
References: <20120815190455.14702.74089.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <618FF5D7-5351-468C-A08E-4C104B063D16@lacnic.net> <BA2EE8F7-92C8-4F10-B10A-2B6FE4FC954A@gmail.com> <502E9614.30409@raszuk.net> <502E9841.8070205@bogus.com> <502E9982.5080909@raszuk.net> <502E9DC3.2020807@bogus.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.01 (LRH 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Milter-Version: master.1+13-gbab1945
X-AV-Type: clean
X-AV-Accuracy: exact
Cc: iaoc@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org, iaoc@ietf.org
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 23:58:05 -0000
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012, joel jaeggli wrote: > On 8/17/12 12:20 PM, Robert Raszuk wrote: > > > > > Hotel contracts by their nature need to be negotiated under mutual > > > NDA unless you want all the vendors in the region to mysteriously > > > arrive at the same lower bound. > > > > All hotel rates are wide open and published on IETF web page. It's an > > interesting NDA which permits open disclosure ;-) > The room rate is... > > Besides hotel is least worry as we do know the IETF rates for the last few > > years and it is quite easy to check with any hotel if they are willing to > > meet those targets or not. > > A week long meeting involving ~1200 people, dozens meeting rooms, plus > ancillary meeting, receptions, takeover and operation of a network, av > support, and catering is a rather different beast. Since folks contributing as Robert has suggested can't enter into actual negotiations, that is probably one factor best left to a formal inquiry. But it seems to me that the question for which local advocates could gather information is the facility qualification in terms of the requirments. I'd guess that IAOC creates a strawman requirement for the meeting which will list criteria like sizes and types of meeting facilities. That strawman reveals a requirment, not any NDA covered negotiation. For this discussion, it should include an analysis of travel time and costs from some common major hubs in NA, Europe, SA, Asia as I assume this data would be part of the IAOC decision process and it should help if the local advocates do the travel research.
- IETF 92 in Dallas! IETF Administrative Director
- Re: [IAB] IETF 92 in Dallas! Mary Barnes
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Arturo Servin
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Alejandro Acosta
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! joel jaeggli
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Mark Andrews
- Re: [IAB] IETF 92 in Dallas! John Levine
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [IAB] IETF 92 in Dallas! Tony Hansen
- Re: [IAB] IETF 92 in Dallas! Carlos M. martinez
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Bob Hinden
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Arturo Servin
- Re: [IAB] IETF 92 in Dallas! John R Levine
- Re: [IAB] IETF 92 in Dallas! Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [IAB] IETF 92 in Dallas! Mary Barnes
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [IAB] IETF 92 in Dallas! Wes Hardaker
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Robert Raszuk
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! joel jaeggli
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Robert Raszuk
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! joel jaeggli
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! John C Klensin
- Re: [IAOC] IETF 92 in Dallas! John C Klensin
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! ... vetting of alternatives David Morris
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Michal Krsek
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Worley, Dale R (Dale)
- Re: [IAOC] IETF 92 in Dallas! Dave Crocker
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Ole Jacobsen
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Glen Zorn
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Ole Jacobsen (ole)
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Randy Bush
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Michael Richardson
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Pelletier Ray
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Randy Bush
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Dave Crocker
- Re: much farther away than IETF 92 in Dallas! John Levine
- Re: much farther away than IETF 92 in Dallas! Worley, Dale R (Dale)
- Re: IETF 92 in Dallas! Michael Richardson