Re: The first issue (was : A sort of council of elders for the internet)

Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Fri, 15 November 2013 12:01 UTC

Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
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 7EADB11E8102 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 04:01:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.119
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.119 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, 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 wjGBWzcsuwx0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 04:01:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C86A11E80FC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 04:01:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=beta; t=1384516871; bh=xA/3+EAuC7C6k0JI14aWS3m9BuiHRbBDJ8fMeqGAS8s=; l=1301; h=Date:From:To:References:In-Reply-To; b=eU0oaC9qVBYZEFTq3sROYktuiUaQ8i2K8WGDLZv70GGqKhhwYH81y1QXoAaoKyLe0 vmnqTF2z92/4ZW8KhjCOmknYWNdnJCezJy4nD3e6tcwt6KBeyYD0KuHEBPGKD0lRxG merXkCTaW7ValuUfiYGZ3PBLIftiTbb0ojlbyQTc=
Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted)
Received: from [172.25.197.158] (pcale.tana [172.25.197.158]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPA; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 13:01:11 +0100 id 00000000005DC039.0000000052860D07.00004C15
Message-ID: <52860D07.2000509@tana.it>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 13:01:11 +0100
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20131103 Icedove/17.0.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: The first issue (was : A sort of council of elders for the internet)
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20131108141553.0b6a0df8@elandnews.com> <CAA=duU3Cdz1gj6Z5eXTqWYXf_bX68dGCQsNnJe95WEzdsv4u8A@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20131109094851.0c663970@resistor.net> <290E20B455C66743BE178C5C84F1240847E3E25DA8@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk> <527F6064.5020101@bwijnen.net> <527FB928.7000204@gmail.com> <6824449A-CC4F-4308-9A62-9305DD10EFF6@nominum.com> <527FDB95.7040403@gmail.com> <A63CF092-070F-4117-B2BC-7A1D5E4E4232@nominum.com> <527FE1EA.9060301@gmail.com> <CADnDZ8_AnNApi7_u6kTEO_VFxzpKdh9s+L7dAciZJFg8xQ_UWA@mail.gmail.com> <52826D4D.8050903@tana.it> <6.2.5.6.2.20131112221402.0d0595b8@resistor.net> <CADnDZ8_6-FaEDkh5EppuUSVu2rdBYPpSurMGZDEAo03EbsBHfw@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20131113091606.0d19e0e8@resistor.net> <5283D6A6.1060400@plixer.com> <5284C6AB.4080701@tana.it> <F5063677821E3B4F81ACFB7905573F240653E953E3@MX15A.corp.emc.com> <52851C4E.3070602@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <52851C4E.3070602@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 12:01:19 -0000

On Thu 14/Nov/2013 19:54:06 +0100 Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 15/11/2013 03:20, Moriarty, Kathleen wrote:
> ...
>> I don't think it's the IETF's place to provide a policy back to
>> companies on who to send or how many people can attend.  This is
>> a financial decision for many companies.  The cost of the trip
>> itself isn't the issue, but the person's time for the week may
>> be.
>
> I completely agree. On the other hand, we could have a prominent
> "equal opportunity" statement that would remind everybody, including
> employers, that we want diversity among our participants. (And think
> what fun we could have wordsmithing such a statement.)

Me too.  If improperly worded, Vegas-like ladies admission policies
might carry the risk of inadvertently putting in some "What Happens
Here Stays Here" slogan as well  ;-)

The other issue, involving small businesses, probably needs something
more substantial than a policy.  For a small business, the cost of the
trip can be weighty in and of itself, let alone the person's time,
e.g. [1].  Arrangements such as tax breaks or public subsidies are out
of IETF reach, AFAIK.  Could ISOC help here, maybe?

Ale

[1] Things that need discussion face to face?
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/spfbis/current/msg01789.html