Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input

Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> Tue, 24 May 2016 19:58 UTC

Return-Path: <akatlas@gmail.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 E320012D504 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 May 2016 12:58:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 AZH0n_zJb2d2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 May 2016 12:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-x234.google.com (mail-yw0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::234]) (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 5063312D518 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2016 12:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw0-x234.google.com with SMTP id x189so26963146ywe.3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2016 12:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=FCBbAZvi4I8yhXjSUd8VxaG42cJg/aMWsXReX0tI3f0=; b=T1O9eBPrARclPcDs28Ke13N0gwFEFovylIfXCaIWlaNxCskDpwlgHFXnLHs3rNkSuS XE6wILomsX1RrUdEgO/U2y8lN42z9GjET8UtKAe1yXyWRK3/RXlbSGMXrHkkls5VMmog /WbEKSdLgikFI+NDXkMpm+K+wrKqSsNDMD6E5PDzHPVk/ijjC+odA8krEAPEER6+yAnQ qscOmwZBwO0YuxbRv7BaGBI2zVxam2rSB52wVlw1IEBxcKzO04EQ3WwdpXblzTcJADT8 Kb4igbNYq4DkdFQEK543jDTA65hlzaC1sGndUIjJ4NNV8foxRQ9SaXtNxYX7ugs+z2G8 y4wA==
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:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=FCBbAZvi4I8yhXjSUd8VxaG42cJg/aMWsXReX0tI3f0=; b=ECO8RkBhy3mF8tmou0Yc3s0c3N+iKDlrmBsE2mZdq3gdz0KA59QUFEsoFWxTmm66Jd nq5AyVRKywa6sNQaV6ScNu3Oi+WNbW7ojO6TfUwmAur/icaBjPC6V3aYjieSDzOj2m6k gJ+OU9dNZriaf551xWJaJi1MErXVk/75vq9SL7VfD7XKYEzU962DSRN3PNIMnmteEQPe 1FM7qc53YV8FgSqtaQYmyIjEtgLJgDCx+ndv1jrotxQgV17ekCyhBBPFadqaqXsI4SyI AifCHJCTjmVO2iyi+aCaN+h3UeRq04HEGLOcXAtphC2Ektg5scHq+OMMQEm3GZkDN2bh 067w==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIezdB1TQy5ZkK06lO0IWNCd5HgiBCV8YfyFHLnOIQDNjQCsrBv9io3KuVUYCS6mDKjkIGNxIFJTFIPKg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.37.83.131 with SMTP id h125mr3553890ybb.109.1464119884443; Tue, 24 May 2016 12:58:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.13.221.74 with HTTP; Tue, 24 May 2016 12:58:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAPt1N1kG2_P5yBEOrajkNXZms438xRZuQTTcPnWnGDoqkYZCUQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <D3662363.190A96%jon.peterson@neustar.biz> <CAHkmkwtEtDk4sPv3GjkrSFqOdRV3HBA5i2_uZu3X2D4RxSF4wA@mail.gmail.com> <2e95fd51-23b8-39e7-d4ca-a9fc9d49559c@gmail.com> <CAHkmkwsf3YfFfR7jUHYnaw6dCrasMOazjbXPJRRhZS28k8HV0w@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1605241405210.28372@uplift.swm.pp.se> <714DDDE2-562D-488A-AAAA-F8DE3C2CA97D@consulintel.es> <FE76F502-617E-4190-BFF5-649EC9CFECAC@consulintel.es> <CABcZeBMPAFdLwZTr7TCJC-tZ+X=CKGzQ7Jp0zqDO86PdPn6YvQ@mail.gmail.com> <8D82EA4F-1275-436C-8030-1E799F5D7F59@consulintel.es> <CABcZeBOCtk6JK_3w2_L87oyze+dfgy7fFyU7QrGmGgEtta1oZA@mail.gmail.com> <1CA535AB-CAC4-49CB-B094-AAA7FE3119FB@consulintel.es> <2b01eb8f-d319-7d20-0f84-9a774f9e0e44@nostrum.com> <C01AE269-3168-4B6A-B8D8-D97230288302@gmail.com> <8161273d-97c2-2757-5f0c-6146d0b297aa@nostrum.com> <E51DA1A2-AB3E-42F7-BC0A-308BE6B58580@gmail.com> <2270ea7c-cd6d-c3d5-e768-6d1f0ae15605@nostrum.com> <216D2B11-5E07-4DBE-BCC4-0A8ABCCB15B7@gmail.com> <cf9ad015-ef7d-6e11-44e8-6a0fb5a78b91@gmail.com> <EBBFC64A-C730-47D8-8F66-E4C7773A0344@gmail.com> <D5E06CF1-9C2D-41BE-8635-1F73321986EC@consulintel.es> <CAG4d1rfvYrW5TDCzdUoFeeQFnsDejWFn7jH+20xnJ4QHEsJ=2g@mail.gmail.com> <CAPt1N1kG2_P5yBEOrajkNXZms438xRZuQTTcPnWnGDoqkYZCUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 15:58:04 -0400
Message-ID: <CAG4d1revHP29U6uc4uUocUeL9vWSAPHd1_L-BVbBbAkKOd2-sg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113e60ba9efa5005339bf928
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/qAVjmCI-hv6_8ceofLhGILOAt60>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>, Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
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: Tue, 24 May 2016 19:58:07 -0000

Hi Ted,

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:

> If we are going to bring breastfeeding into this, which seems reasonable,
> it's worth asking if someone can actually construct a situation in which
> the breastfeeding mother would be present with the baby, but the local
> government would not recognize _her_ parental rights.   Or is the concern
> that if she were incapacitated, the other parent would be unable to take
> responsibility for the baby?   I think you have to engage in some pretty
> significant contortions to construct this as a problem that the IAOC
> absolutely must, out of fairness, solve.   That said, I have no personal
> experience in this, so I'm asking, not telling: is there a scenario where
> this would actually be a problem?   How likely is this in practice?
>

My point is not that breastfeeding mothers need specific accommodations by
the IAOC - but rather that there absolutely are reasons that a parent may
need to bring a child along so that the parent can constructively work.
This is a common one.  There are others - even as trivial as being a single
parent.

Depending upon adoption issues, it's certainly possibly that a woman may be
nursing a baby to whom she is not the bio-mom. There could certainly be
concern about the other parent not being able to take responsibility for
the baby.

My email isn't a "don't forget this special case" to the IAOC - but rather
to those cheerfully giving up their right to bring
family along because they haven't personally experienced the need to do so
or the complex gyrations that causes.

There are certainly conferences that help by providing information about
chlidcare (frequently available through the hotel or such) or even
organizing joint childcare.  Strangely enough, that helps increase the
participation of those with young children and childcare responsibilities
(frequently women).  I am not requesting that the IAOC do so - though
certainly gathering information about childcare one time for use by many
would be helpful.

Regards,
Alia



>
> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Jordi,
>>
>> I've never heard any indication that the extremely minimal companion
>> stuff (a mailing list and one gathering that the companions pay for) has
>> factored into the IAOC venue-selection.
>>
>> It's always easy to give up - in the abstract - things that don't affect
>> you.
>>
>> In this particular instance, the concern is about keeping legal
>> guardianship & medical concerns in a
>> country whose laws may not recognize familial ties legal in other
>> countries.   There can certainly be personal
>> reasons why bringing a child along is necessary - and they don't require
>> others' judgement as to whether those
>> reasons are "deserving" enough.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alia
>>
>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 3:04 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <
>> jordi.palet@consulintel.es> wrote:
>>
>>> +1  to drop companion stuff IF it is increasing the IAOC venue-selection
>>> criteria difficulties, and I want to make it clear, even if it affects me
>>> personally at any time.
>>>
>>> Even if is only for simple curiosity (I don’t think our decisions must
>>> consider other organizations decisions, but is always good to know), it
>>> will be nice to know if venue-selection-criteria of other similar
>>> organizations take in consideration possible “difficulties” for
>>> companion/familties.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Jordi
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Mensaje original-----
>>> De: ietf <ietf-bounces@ietf.org> en nombre de Yoav Nir <
>>> ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
>>> Responder a: <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
>>> Fecha: martes, 24 de mayo de 2016, 20:52
>>> Para: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
>>> CC: <ietf@ietf.org>
>>> Asunto: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path
>>> forward and request for input
>>>
>>> >
>>> >> On 24 May 2016, at 9:28 PM, Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> On 5/24/16 10:14 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
>>> >>> Then I guess where I disagree with both you and Melinda is that I
>>> don’t
>>> >>> think the ability to bring families along should be an important
>>> >>> consideration.
>>> >>
>>> >> I don't, either, but as long as the IETF does, and provides
>>> >> a companion program, I feel quite strongly that IETF travel
>>> >> should be equally accessible to all families.  I'd personally
>>> >> be good with dropping the companion stuff UNLESS it was done
>>> >> specifically to avoid problems with travel to places hostile
>>> >> to same-sex partners.
>>> >
>>> >I would be happy with dropping the companion stuff for many reasons.
>>> The fact that it adds considerations and criteria to the IAOC’s decision
>>> process that already has way too many criteria is just another reason to
>>> drop it.
>>> >
>>> >Yoav
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>