Re: Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Thu, 21 April 2016 14:55 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 DBF9D12D71D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 07:55:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 RjFDlhvs93b2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 07:55:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22f.google.com (mail-lf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B7E4312D10F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 07:55:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id j11so62276580lfb.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 07:55:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=U2MxC2GHE18wUNcjWy7nHER02fDqSf9tXz/qUhIYxeE=; b=o0GoJn8uskbIw2vZP9iM+Y6VtVObrPas7fhLfLbPq/tqgLmDJsWB+KTzPg21EZPbRh CUDOtepLblmLn5nB8lLkqegOmW3odYKdOdLd1ViUS2QA4tr2hB8ZYKahivATJvIp0eNN w2CFIf5u7S8UHXeVOwOR4nYCXsgHJJcjT0Kwg9UkF38MYykLZxAtok9AOi/b9sve9iWf sgYx994L4iTyIqTfWr2kg2hDtF9r2/phSP9OlBGoyKAYUkr0yC4ycpsH4jSlFrDkh8wm QflOBRyh00At9a99PCFjDK7gVwuiIukmpsBV8iCf99Th+ycKX8WPFeaN3u67EKC0GLti fWDA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=U2MxC2GHE18wUNcjWy7nHER02fDqSf9tXz/qUhIYxeE=; b=jZFCwxXiXjrMehQ6ghoy8dqJ/Sgi23OC8FtBw2RqVvvjNOr8qAj//erRnUoe6Nvr8S cORv4bl/wV92GcZOqo1ZowVCZMtztygivB5r+AuyZJq8qohQqISROoqg5r+xOwI15hsZ q2CU+udA6D6UAjG8TU5L7VCL2LtNaBoJ+e9tg0lpJrou7QMuQyjtM8kb/M51GUopeRTN 0eqMHDGxXmCgtVYHh5NnTqSYBBvj93WV7JHaMHgAjhiypi1yA2vgSKhXoHXEOCLQQBGk l0u/oIh0aZ9Dwoon8wBzR3l+nqxkAXn+Pcie+41ZWUj8u9ssaMrsde2LzmZ0UHB+GFln 3NIQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FW0SkHuv5zvo6P1JuM5dcH+ryKPCoa5dS0gCgqFQsGoW95DSxlW+39oOuBUSmL2MRbHqqrQhbyhYlnfrQ==
X-Received: by 10.25.153.136 with SMTP id b130mr6502577lfe.53.1461250522912; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 07:55:22 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.213.19 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 07:54:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [71.233.41.235]
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwjW9+Y6E=t7oNjFcviQoXLESS-C-bn+W9rymjaHXUJskQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160418161552.9368.65562.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <8fb376e11631f9ddf73f9385ec5472c3.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <57151C55.30206@gmail.com> <CAMm+LwjW9+Y6E=t7oNjFcviQoXLESS-C-bn+W9rymjaHXUJskQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 10:54:43 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1=KeDCOg4XpGxaCuP5EDmgFARgYxBhvg3E386=dBFkbxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1140392658b1e20530ffe68f"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/nVAhHS_okqN1TuFP7fmmnfmznE4>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
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, 21 Apr 2016 14:55:29 -0000

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <
phill@hallambaker.com> wrote:

> I think people are missing the point of the 'world tour'. It is not
> just what happens inside the IETF that is important, it is the
> perception of the IETF in other forums. In particular government
> forums.
>

+1

However, I think what Melinda is saying and what you are saying are not in
conflict.   We have a problem in the IETF that in-person attendance counts
for too much.   This is a real problem.   We should do something about it.
  Then the question of whether to do world tours becomes more of a
logistical/financial issue, which is really what it should be.   And like
you, I found this trip much easier than going to Asia, although I know our
colleagues from Asia found it just the opposite. :)