Re: IETF 62

Hi Ben and Sam,

Ben Crosby wrote:
> Hear hear!
> 
> I debated posting after the fingerprint thread, and then again after the Cancun
 > comment. Sam's email accurately sums up my own view.
> 
> Further, as the host of IETF61, we explored at least four possible venues,
 > one of which was Ottawa - too bloody awkward to get to, since there 
are very
 > few direct flights, and even fewer venues big enough to support the 
meeting -
 > and another was Florida, a WDW Conference hotel. This venue was 
ultimately
 > rejected for a few reasons, one of which was the implications of
> "work, not play".  DC was ultimately selected as a good "business" town, and I
 > hope it will be a succesful meeting.

It's worth realizing that fingerprinting is a current issue
(and likely a future one) which makes people uncomfortable
and may discourage people from making their first (or next)
visit to IETF, if it's in the 'States.

Considering the high level RIPE/APNIC activity with IPv6, it's
certainly worth minimizing some of the barriers to new participants
in coming to IETF.

Personally, I believe that if I enter a country as its guest, I subject
myself to their rules and security tests.  It doesn't mean I have to
like being fingerprinted though.

I know people for whom this dislike is a serious disincentive to attend.
If we continue to have the high proportion of events scheduled (by
default) in the USA, we may see the variety of international attendees
diminish.

When there have been so few (2 I think) IETFs in Canada it seems a shame
to default to North America == USA and just ignore major cities such as 
Montreal or Toronto, because they're an hour or so further to fly.
As far as I can see, Minneapolis isn't a direct destination for all the
major airlines either.

Like it or not IETF isn't a political organization, but a politically
important one.  If we're choosing locations, sometimes the reason has to 
be political (I'm not talking about going to Canada here).
Seoul IETF apparently made good business sense. It made even better
political sense, since it encouraged government and business figures in
Korea to support IPv6.

If we're prepared to ignore political issues then we may miss such
opportunities for positive outcomes for IETF.

My current opinion only,

Greg Daley

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf