Re: Venue Announcement for IETFs 98, 99, 102 and 111

[Lou Berger <[e-mail]>]

I'd like to add one additional comment as an IAOC member (but not
speaking for the IAOC).  I think we, the IAOC and meetings committee,
can and should do better on transparency of meeting requirements,
selection process, and contracts.  I'm hoping to see some progress on
this before/by BA.

Lou

On 01/08/2016 10:39 AM, Leslie Daigle wrote:
> 
> The other question that has been on my mind is whether or how we
> continue to meet as a community.  In my personal opinion, one of the
> most important things about the IETF *is* the community and having the
> opportunity to engage one on one.    I go to IETF meetings for hallway
> conversations as much as anything else.  But — in the span of the next
> 10 years, it’s not clear to me if we can or should find non-meeting ways
> to achieve those effects, and get our work done.
> 
> Absent discussion within and direction from the community on where it
> thinks we’re headed on that front, I (as an IAOC member) was not
> comfortable with agreeing to hotel commitments 8+ years out.  It is my
> understanding that we, in fact, have the ability to cancel the contract
> for IETF 111 with a survivable penalty a few years out.  I.e., it’s a
> good deal for current course and speed, and if that changes
> significantly before we get to the 3 year window, we have the ability to
> reorganize.
> 
> I realize that doesn’t address all of the issues you raised, but
> hopefully it helps at the broad-brushstroke level.
> 
> Leslie.
> 
>