RE: Registration details for IETF 108

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

--On Friday, June 12, 2020 13:37 -0700 Larry Masinter
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>...
> For moving IETF online, I'd suggest hiring some group that
> does it  for a living
> 
> https://www.diplomacy.edu/conference-tech-lab
> 
> in consultation with IETF in an open transparent manner, of
> course.

Larry, that path leads to a rathole-rich environment with very
smart and well-fed rats. Among other things, I note that Diplo's
list does not include Meetecho, which I believe IETF chose for
good reasons and with the limitations of other systems for our
purposes in mind and then, more important, assorted people
(including Ray and the Secretariat) worked closely with the
developers to further adapt to our needs.

Moreover, unless something has changed that you or Jay know
about but I don't, prior experience with Meetecho strongly
suggests that, if we discover deficiencies that we would like to
have corrected before IETF 108 and give them reasonable notice,
the chances of getting those changes made are quite good.
Having tried, in non-IETF contexts, to work with the providers
of three or four of the systems Diplo lists to get bugs or
unfortunate features fixed, a year or two might be plausible,
but not six weeks... unless , of course, one is a government
making demands and/or threats.

It seems to me that Jay has, to his credit even if he has not
gotten it right every time, been struggling to avoid such
ratholes.  If nothing else, even if Diplo were a perfect match,
there almost certainly is not enough time to work out a contract
with them, have them understand our needs, adjust fees as
needed, and then go into a meeting that is now only six weeks
away without creating unacceptable risk.

So, at minimum, can we postpone that particular discussion until
we get through IETF 108 and can start assessing what we learned
and what to do next?

thanks,
   john