limiting our set of cities

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 20 February 2020 10:34 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
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 DADFA120024; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 02:34:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.501
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.399, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 5GNQPiwgDYie; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 02:34:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (minerva.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2a01:7e00::3d:b000]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE6B012001A; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 02:34:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dooku.sandelman.ca (x59cc8baf.dyn.telefonica.de [89.204.139.175]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BD2D1F458; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 10:34:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dooku.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 937501A3B6D; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 11:34:42 +0100 (CET)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: limiting our set of cities
In-reply-to: <9B420C95-9E85-4969-ADCA-8F3AAE026396@ietf.org>
References: <13820272-7189-4803-A842-EA86FE051C10@live555.com> <9B420C95-9E85-4969-ADCA-8F3AAE026396@ietf.org>
Comments: In-reply-to Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org> message dated "Thu, 20 Feb 2020 17:38:16 +1300."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 25.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 11:34:42 +0100
Message-ID: <17764.1582194882@dooku>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/jc5FCp2YOVXeE8bgKFgKGTjvTj8>
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: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 10:34:47 -0000

Jay, and/or Jason:

Can you tell the community if the LLC has any plans/thoughts to stop looking
for new places to meet, rather to just establish a list of 10-15 cities where
we have successfully met, and simply repeat?

Many have suggested this as a better policy, but it seems that it's just
discussion.

Christian Huitema made a good case already for the Asia list being not just
Bangkok/Singapore, but also including Tokyo/Yokohama and Seoul.
That's four for Asia.

One could easily add: North America: Vancouver, San Francisco, Montreal, Philadelphia.
Europe: Prague, Berlin, London, (Paris?)

There, that's 12 cities already, and I said 10-15.
Could probably add another three.  Maybe Madrid will wind up on the list.

I'm sure that many of the cities on your list are potentially interesting,
but why bother make the effort?
Yes, we should have "*" in the rotation 1-1-1-*, but we should do it
intentionally as reach out.
I don't see Austin (or Ottawa, or Malta) as being reach-out, as nice as they
might be.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-