Re: Planned changes to registration payments & deadlines

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 24 April 2018 02:47 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@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 EDED9127058 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 19:47:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 gvCizI8hojxZ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 19:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg0-x22b.google.com (mail-pg0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::22b]) (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 239CF127010 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 19:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id m21so6732694pgv.8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 19:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=bb+1px72U8eiX/lRNA1XkEeaWsApdA9pggFB7XbhSPk=; b=k1nxFCiECeaP5wIVfY4X4epOEZiJ2sFiQadpKfEh4yNNH4/yxhgQ6rvEIUIcx/Qg9G fudrHuuAVH8h8dD+OfbRt7xE4nz9V68acoTULDnATXYr8M5aJ56e9DX+VXDW7IBmsEtW /OrXSdbBVNJ119OR1dYZvFtfKgSHiUpmTTP4D3BJzZZCjCe22ZUnAPG7bO89kmpBbuH5 aplDH65kuROGO4Qz7yzp8sPGekpZwtcjXMkKkvT8zEaXTLHv+W//pi/ozaWMklj+PVO2 BahxcYdarDmCc85eipX+IlP8aF0aKErkWsTf406Vadqpq3meg7nEzS85udzGT9i7k3o5 0S0w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bb+1px72U8eiX/lRNA1XkEeaWsApdA9pggFB7XbhSPk=; b=WC6bTr8VgywDh79WMDtnkYMELJHiGId4+9jJK8FvSaPRrGQNPhPVVmDfsKnS7hxdS8 MsTrmkevxLEHPhb4F6TnPNvj6IatDj6hruHBP6cduLyxJiDLfsbUzI0W+YHWmvwH7Z1D mDOk0/ZuxysDZNLbEu5FD+NY5WFA48Hoxq9JdiPf8EZgQtiWJA+7hiHEGseRVF3N37QS vRLBv7G4RaQnjdKg5HFEB8X6zVTnY/xAfsCSbpzqxtPYUg4lIgQj8YSx0hRmEzVfO8XR MsbjN8mqfePuk/mf6yfPMfkJOX25KD/lDdUzzUlJloPAS7SqQgDe2xSJ7h/mZwVpqN+I nkkQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tCQRZx88Mtm/Dz3VaZQQd3praYNKxgsni0vzo1CRfffcqbO+7Sb gDNJ55NX41wciJvglLLt/IAVrg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx496VpYfjTooC2CmS9FYiNfi2aQVnQD/pp9t0Bk4QE5JyFbXSCHSVgA15XdbHxnHCZ3LIXZnhw==
X-Received: by 10.98.212.67 with SMTP id u3mr21756310pfl.58.1524538021340; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 19:47:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.26] ([118.149.104.73]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p1sm28445117pgc.15.2018.04.23.19.46.58 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 23 Apr 2018 19:47:00 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Brian Carpenter <becarpenter46@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Planned changes to registration payments & deadlines
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, ietf@ietf.org
References: <20180419174627.2krzjbxgx25s5wxz@mx4.yitter.info> <20180423162016.elmju5r6qcb6xcbt@anvilwalrusden.com> <49c1c20d-000c-9664-d998-cace737704d8@gmail.com> <9954.1524528938@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <E3942A1DBD7E232532060E6F@PSB> <E3E65B79-8147-4073-BC5C-2730E7E6A9D9@fugue.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5a2525b4-95e3-2935-3463-f2365acc3b72@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 14:46:59 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <E3E65B79-8147-4073-BC5C-2730E7E6A9D9@fugue.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/sfnUIZoeJAwmkT0F8ghpp88UqBs>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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 Apr 2018 02:47:04 -0000

On 24/04/2018 13:39, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Apr 23, 2018, at 9:03 PM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:
>> Or try the other end.  For IETF-type meetings, it is not unusual
>> for a travel-approver to want to see at least a preliminary
>> agenda along with the travel request.  On our current schedule,
>> the preliminary agenda shows up about four weeks before the
>> meeting and the nominally final one shows up a week later, but
>> before the "early" registration cutoff.   If that boundary is
>> moved back, than no one who needs an agenda to make a decision,
>> or to persuade someone else to make a positive decision, then it
>> is all over for "early" and the window before "standard" is not
>> available is rather short.
> 
> This seems like a feature, not a bug.   People whose companies have expensive processes like this can afford to pay full price; they don't need the early bird discount.   If you don't tell them about it they'll never know that if they'd had a less rigid process they could have saved $200.

That varies very widely, but sadly it might work the other way: even if
it's internal procedure that causes you to miss the early-bird deadline,
some companies I can think of would still ding you for paying full rate.
I agree that the IETF isn't obliged to pander to corporate stupidity,
however. Nevertheless, my gut tells me that shifting this deadline to
roughly the middle of the inter-meeting gap will hurt a number of
attendees.

(That said: Thanks to IASA for bringing this up for discussion well in
advance.)

> Also, FWIW, unless your travel approver is a lot more diligent than most, the information you get from the working group summaries, which are due on the Friday at the end of IETF, should be sufficient for a travel report.

Again, expectations and requirements vary. Personally I've always written
my own IETF trip reports promptly; since I've had a laptop, they've
usually been finished before I get home.

    Brian