Re: "We did not know" is not a good excuse

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Thu, 07 April 2016 20:49 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 9E36412D10C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 13:49:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 U7Wkzm-XryRF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 13:49:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE38D12D0AC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 13:49:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 89311 invoked from network); 7 Apr 2016 20:49:43 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 7 Apr 2016 20:49:43 -0000
Date: 7 Apr 2016 20:38:11 -0000
Message-ID: <20160407203811.54154.qmail@ary.lan>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: "We did not know" is not a good excuse
In-Reply-To: <DAC6168972FB4273973AC87E@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/hxqkzh8DkzwE_4edu0cgMIrE4LY>
Cc: john-ietf@jck.com
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 07 Apr 2016 20:49:45 -0000

>My apologies... bad example.   I was, however, thinking less of
>the city area to country area ratio than about the "probably
>only one plausible city in the country to hold an IETF-sized
>meeting" issue.    I should have been more clear about that or
>chosen a better example (or, more likely, both).  

Unless the country is so small that there's only one plausible meeting
hotel, that still doesn't strike me as a problem.

So if they said they were thinking about the Bahamas, that could be a
problem, anywhere else, not so much.

R's,
John