Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Wed, 08 August 2012 02:20 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 0527E21F84F1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 19:20:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.59
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.59 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.009, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cEHDQKMcBNq3 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 19:20:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 008B421F84EC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 19:20:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.11] (adsl-67-127-55-201.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.55.201]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q782KTYM019913 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 7 Aug 2012 19:20:30 -0700
Message-ID: <5021CCE8.6020106@dcrocker.net>
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 19:20:24 -0700
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Subject: Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)
References: <20120808002934.12325.qmail@joyce.lan>
In-Reply-To: <20120808002934.12325.qmail@joyce.lan>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Tue, 07 Aug 2012 19:20:30 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 02:20:32 -0000

On 8/7/2012 5:29 PM, John Levine wrote:
>> So I agree with that. If a feasible venue actually in Dublin
>> turns up I'll be sure to let Ray/IAOC/site-visit folks know.
>
> The Burlington hotel claims that they can host a 1500 person meeting.


Yeah, it's exactly that easy to choose a venue.  A single number does it.[1]

not.

Folks, the IETF actually has a rather constraining set of requirements 
and the secretariat has to put in quite a bit of effort to qualify 
venues.  Many places that are otherwise just dandy can't deal with these 
complexities.  For example, we run quite a few parallel meetings that 
are large.

Take a careful look at the range of serious complaints that get lodged 
about venues and you can start to glean the requirements list.  (I said 
serious.  That is, complaints that get significant traction from the 
community.)

Perhaps the Burlington really can accommodate us, but given the rate at 
which places get rejected, the expectation ain't great.  That doesn't 
mean reject it out of hand, of course.


d/


[1] For the places that we do go to and that we like, I've no idea what 
single capacity number they typically cite, but I predict it's more like 
double our actual size, if not triple.

-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net