Re: Concerns about Singapore

[<[e-mail]>]

Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]> writes:

> On 11/04/2016 02:48, Michael StJohns wrote:
>> On 4/10/2016 10:45 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>>>>> it was clean unfettered Internet.  some local folk stuck their necks out
>>>>> very far to accomplish this.  it was definitely different than one got
>>>>> outside of the ietf meeting network.  this has been a condition placed
>>>>> on hosts and beijing was no exception.
>>>> This surprises me - "this has been a condition placed on hosts...".
>
> In the case of Beijing it was very clear from the earliest discussions,
> going back to 2005 and before, to my personal knowledge.
>
> ...
>>
>> I repeat - "where" have the local hosts/laws specified conditions that resulted in the IETF network content access being
>> markedly different than that accessible to the random local citizen?
>
> Why is that relevant? The criterion is: can the IETF do its work properly?
> Of which a sub-criterion is: will there be clean unfettered Internet at
> the meeting site?

It's certainly relevant to me, b/c I don't personally think that IETF
meetings should be held in oppressive and censoring countries. I don't
know how to articulate this well -- others are better at it -- but I
certainly would like to skip any meetings that I feel violate IETFs
value of openness so that I can at least vote with my feet and my
dollars.

Thanks,
Chris.

>
> How RFC 4084 applies in the local coffee shops is another matter.
>
>    Brian