Re: [Ietf108planning] Registration open for IETF 108

Michael Thomas <> Fri, 12 June 2020 00:01 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0F623A0C6C for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 17:01:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.651
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.651 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Tv4tpme9c3fq for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 17:01:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::636]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0BAF13A0C6D for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 17:01:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id g12so2969750pll.10 for <>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 17:01:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=aidefNYaiFWI25/IFCmA2mHenhtJdAXgXrmNSD8cNuc=; b=c5hsklAnPd/CyrlOsnmImRhEUkRqnOpJ5w8u2M/VuIF+501qs65zbnWawbG04qiv8F uf2EyA4M/golpP+NalKhekLfxFrzeAluAGS+IzTj99DgIYmWZqn/6eWLuR9R75qWUMyJ /Vt7tNwyVgtfM6en3rSN6SuoE39YDiD6eFt+g4fMZ1fYCyeirh1o4gRqqDrjQCknaVc4 fHxlzR/yCR8jFPyYZziUyafKYg3NCGi6S2f5KeEfVFSgStMXXkaNWenGgb9xnbzOFP/q cP80jIRn8vGyc/dAQgmftPa3Jk6YcYlMfe8W3QrTJqQ3fu31oyaSW3Jb2unKGrfPghQE L+Eg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=aidefNYaiFWI25/IFCmA2mHenhtJdAXgXrmNSD8cNuc=; b=r1IUFLbSPnyDQk9itEkxpWC3ch+TC17KDn6YRCflvoGxalj/BmXOz7OfZzpyFkAAfL IVKA2RXZUFsGLKYm5pVj641R6uUjugjkIt8Uw+Iq2jyPT+Q7alLxuwdyhGIDtaLKaqb0 dAabXIDiszF/8G+X5lQg6JmGXE6ZM67eJj4VNZFofzMpiMyBD5xrhYRl8bfvmf4jC0KZ K9/g8iZUQlHXUJpZP9Jub2bjCwNAx2nLePPnnzcNzMV9dfRnBaynw/29Cm8+tnZkhGt1 UXp0mgobFL6s0TSG4SnKvVjxZnDJ2hNBqsJsiEYBhP2tgwCkJUJH4qh80PBXtrKM32wL xSRQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533JZ8U0VMNvSXWbZxpkvu1cCkpoMwHgcMtjRkisNExRbiA8M2er l1yaRn2/kgWSzYoOfhfyV0y4sBRQEJs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy0Bbn2XG3GNIxSOSgZQ4PIl/34frX+KTRnmxZLAsYVKBqHpNhBNpGpItd4HVHkKmtOlPAK1Q==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:6bcb:: with SMTP id m11mr9139454plt.126.1591920065552; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 17:01:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MichaelsMacBook.lan ( []) by with ESMTPSA id j17sm190248pgn.87.2020. (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 17:01:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Ietf108planning] Registration open for IETF 108
To: Stephen Farrell <>,
References: <> <20200611011728.9AC071A5EFB6@ary.qy> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Michael Thomas <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 17:01:02 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
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: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 00:01:09 -0000

On 6/11/20 4:39 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> On 12/06/2020 00:02, Michael Thomas wrote:
>> I get the impression that this is more about is your $CORP sending
>> you, or are you paying for it on your own dime.
> Not sure that's quite right tbh. Doesn't cover people from
> situations where they're very unlikely to ever be able to
> afford the travel. But it's not only about that - if we end
> up charging for the wrong things in the wrong way, then I'd
> bet that'd damage the entire concept of IETF-meetings and
> cross-area review (or whichever aspect of that kind of
> serendipity you like most) and we'd end up more like a set
> of unrelated industry-projects than not. That's a bit
> negative and very speculative, as such things must be, but
> I don't think it's that wild to see some of the possible
> outcomes here doing damage to the idea of there even being
> an IETF community accessible to anyone with technical clue
> who wants to elbow their way in. (Ditto for scenarios that
> don't require elbows, which are of course nicer:-)

G*wd help us if this turns into a freemium kind of model where certain 
virtual meeting features are unlocked. I totally get TANSTAFAAL, and 
IETF needs to be funded. It's just that it ain't going be done by 
cheapskates like me who aren't going to globe trot either. Of course the 
vast number of meeting goers probably get that too, but i do worry that 
bean counters' bots will sound the alarm if atoms are not involved 
somehow. Maybe you can ship out cookies to each paid attendee as proof 
that atoms were involved? :)