Summarizing comments received on deadline & fees plan

Andrew Sullivan <> Tue, 22 May 2018 18:41 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0E0312D778; Tue, 22 May 2018 11:41:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.b=FbsVczPL; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.b=ScQvWQ41
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0t6XjwpZVjzD; Tue, 22 May 2018 11:41:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1A2E12AF83; Tue, 22 May 2018 11:41:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F4D9BB833; Tue, 22 May 2018 18:41:42 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=default; t=1527014502; bh=vaOZa73v3cE5EC5uVDcSH8auP062CboW68a9DHY1J6s=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:From; b=FbsVczPLm7MJHX3S2tq9QTnNIOQ2YBwYfjf/BcAgIDWqhkh1LrspF0MO2MCc/XCKW X6C3tV1p/OV8+EX9EAmt6AJDkQI9I3Io4T02zTb5Nsxo8ywlUmV9Y4VnKLHxOz+qho 4jY4VVg/LGRyq8mVO3Gk3KslDmQns4Qy79W4EFA0=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4jvXwezA3Pda; Tue, 22 May 2018 18:41:41 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:41:39 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=default; t=1527014500; bh=vaOZa73v3cE5EC5uVDcSH8auP062CboW68a9DHY1J6s=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:From; b=ScQvWQ41Ce/SIAHD9vOx0L61jD8H4Dbw7xHPBZVXyTdmgrMJzaIlZip6zgfTujhPC B036pOfz/eUDK8o+3y4pibSz95JlwX7+TRJREo9jO4wJMGYFrZ0eg39SyqKXHxa2// izms8XHOC6+jdyQgxJv9FcTVIx5sK8MfuTut8Qgw=
From: Andrew Sullivan <>
Subject: Summarizing comments received on deadline & fees plan
Message-ID: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 18:41:45 -0000

Dear colleagues,

About a month ago, I posted a plan for changes to the registration
payments and deadlines for IETF meetings.  You can find the beginning
of the thread at  

I reviewed all the comments and drew some conclusions, which the IAOC
has seen:

    1.  The plan is basically sound.  The deadlines are about right
    and the amounts are ok.

    2.  We must make crystal clear that we will permit registration to
    happen in multiple parts, and allow people to return later to pay
    (whatever the fee is on that day).  We must make clear that we are
    changing the meaning of "registered" to be "paid registration" and
    getting rid of the idea of unpaid registration.

    3.  We must make clear how we'll handle visa letters.

    4.  When announcing a meeting, we should announce how we plan to
    communicate the plans about any social event.

    5.  We should request WG chairs to announce to their WGs as early
    as possible their intention (or not) to hold a WG meeting at an
    IETF meeting.  Ideally, this will happen before the early bird cut
    off so that people have a better chance of getting travel

Given this feedback, I believe our plan is fundamentally sound and
that we will be going ahead with it.  There are some details to work
out, but the dates will be as previously announced.  (This is
important to announce now, so that the "Important Dates" for this
November's meeting can be published.)

We on the IAOC appreciate the comments we received and the
confirmation from the community that what we plan to do is a
reasonable way forward.  We heard and understood the concerns people
had about details of implementation, and will attend to those

There were two issues that came up more than once, sometimes in
off-list comments, that I wish to note.

The first was a question about why we can't just lower the cost of the
meeting, by reducing "frills" such as cookies and coffee and so on.
Unfortunately, that's not really how the hotel and conventions
business works: the venues have a dollar amount they want to get, and
if they don't get it from food and beverage they'll increase meeting
room fees or the like.  Because we are a large group with quite
specific needs, we are not that flexible in our destinations, and the
lack of a competitive environment therefore reduces our ability to
negotiate even more.

The second was a question about the registration terms and
conditions.  I didn't answer that before now because I didn't know the
answer.  It turns out all of the terms and conditions are part of the
registration process itself, and are presented during registration.

Thank you for the feedback.  As we implement this plan we will
continue to keep the community informed.

Best regards,

for the IAOC

Andrew Sullivan