Re: IETF 107 and Corona Virus?

Kathleen Moriarty <> Thu, 13 February 2020 21:11 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF7F8120273 for <>; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 13:11:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EGK3WdEszAd6 for <>; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 13:11:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE7E31207FE for <>; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 13:11:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id c20so7174955qkm.1 for <>; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 13:11:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=Vsp/8wkJ9jgexxrWKCXhCmqMasmvh2g0yAGitqtJNSw=; b=TE+67avAwvFlcX4kHkQoiZ/ErjgQrHioXXqTd7NvkEQQZEsuQzg7cUk7ZlwzcsHKa4 i5ij7pzUlsGwuFmOu6Bp09LVccJ13qhuSC4w6NXoVYTLoOlPcWlxVeKoAg9XYJzcSN6k tHWMksUuG8BVlsGamWdsOxUrSLDcjDuL+GbOAUIbTujjqHs/Xew5YC7h3C85u31C/Kx6 x2vJMBvpdngqzaVZvdl+zX/QphrSkpsCcMBr+cVokNt3bg8T1cSukU/yjSvWU9BfLVI9 XnZWzqLMlLSWYpAovJ28KDnlSmJwQqWHjB50akWV+NnPTyqwL+mkuQkp4XReP1DSNJAz J50g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=Vsp/8wkJ9jgexxrWKCXhCmqMasmvh2g0yAGitqtJNSw=; b=lctteexRB1jpuGdYSmXkCjQluRpAYCFErx2hwL8Q/o0JEN/iQ5iJrd4yql2/QU4Koj W6S7Rt/3E8KwqFfKIQAM3pY8KpjxhIj+vPC0fwqKjn0VjBpuMXzxySv0Wgc9H+3/LlHP /wCeVx+YO4d8IN3DcVVtHUiMe0qIqKHeBnDB4nxzlB0FAiYCrNdxJ3o1qelQSyWZU5vq VmLNFANgALc49seaWohu5vZxhLbmMwGMu/IvpN6SJAfUxcI8o/LXzJnenKB3TnE9rjOu tXYxpCOxTmtVFZfuInkw4Qn515gY+k//0cWNcxDr13+EhMMUz9Xtl8rFO28LL2ldlztn kP0A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXbujJlKLzUlV+AJDhd7UiMU0PWyKz9+wlmtjFZA2WTnM4y8Gtl Px7MjqO/+WcDIQEC81ImQwEdNCph
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxeckrxXP1W+dSgRFqPOabLdbyrG8WDIYB0OoufQr4Z/vK+iT1GPVoqYFS4a9FdyLcxvsNm4Q==
X-Received: by 2002:a37:c07:: with SMTP id 7mr14212046qkm.414.1581628291652; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 13:11:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2600:380:5a17:a3a9:8185:3c32:2fe5:1610? ([2600:380:5a17:a3a9:8185:3c32:2fe5:1610]) by with ESMTPSA id b35sm2197399qtc.9.2020. (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 13 Feb 2020 13:11:31 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-5645EBA8-0078-4ABF-9E99-82CF3187D353
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Kathleen Moriarty <>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: IETF 107 and Corona Virus?
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 16:11:30 -0500
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
Cc: Carsten Bormann <>, IETF <>
In-Reply-To: <>
To: Richard Barnes <>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17D50)
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 21:11:35 -0000

Sent from my mobile device

> On Feb 13, 2020, at 3:50 PM, Richard Barnes <> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 3:37 PM Kathleen Moriarty <> wrote:
>> Hi Carsten,
>> There's one consideration you left out - 
>>> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 3:18 PM Carsten Bormann <> wrote:
>>> On 2020-02-13, at 15:55, Kathleen Moriarty <> wrote:
>>> > 
>>> > That said, my travel is mostly booked and I am planning to attend, but will watch to see what happens with any IETF pandemic planning.
>>> Which is what is probably true for most of us.
>>> We already know that companies’ and countries’ policies will place some limitations on the meeting (which actually is having some limited impact on planning for the meeting).  With the knowledge we have today (2020-02-13), we can assume that we will have a productive meeting, not the least because we have good remote attendance possibilities for those who can’t (or choose not to) make it.
>>> On a health/responsibility level (and, again with the knowledge of today), there simply is no reason to cancel the meeting.  It is still way more likely for an IETF attendee to have a traffic accident than to be impacted by COVID-19.
>> Individuals from an entire nation likely cannot attend what is meant to be a global meeting. This deserves some thought.
> I agree that this is unfortunate, but I don't see how it follows from this that nobody else should meet.

That’s not what my message said.  This would be a normal consideration and addressed point in a risk management process.

Best regards,
> --Richard
>> Best regards,
>> Kathleen
>>> Now that knowledge we have today may change (a.k.a. “surprises”), so the IETF leadership needs to stay in a position to make different decisions based on emerging situations, and new expert advice that may become available.
>>> I still think of the plenary where it was announced that we would meet in Korea and somebody went to the microphone with the concern that North Korea could be attacking Seoul at any time.  Yes, COVID-19 can attack at any time, but it is just one of many risks that we have to juggle.
>>> Grüße, Carsten
>> -- 
>> Best regards,
>> Kathleen