Re: [Ietf108planning] Assessment criteria for decision on in-person/virtual IETF 108

Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net> Tue, 21 April 2020 17:20 UTC

Return-Path: <mstjohns@comcast.net>
X-Original-To: ietf108planning@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf108planning@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F1653A0788 for <ietf108planning@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:20:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, GB_AFFORDABLE=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, LOTS_OF_MONEY=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=comcast.net
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 YQPTQtN6S-0Z for <ietf108planning@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:20:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resqmta-ch2-02v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-02v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 339793A0796 for <ietf108planning@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:20:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resomta-ch2-16v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.112]) by resqmta-ch2-02v.sys.comcast.net with ESMTP id QvLYjytQlGF45QwZPjWWkf; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 17:20:27 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=20190202a; t=1587489627; bh=YOAwDZFButXxwUvIx480XwMLcCX7gBWYYOtmuhbLJsI=; h=Received:Received:Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=Vb/wpleCXpys9G6wwLBNGgOqVkvKpkgjSphLKI79OFUpB2JaYCVERvOBt7uKE3JaK /GmaFq2LaDpVFRsql3EHxqKuX8bCWP9GdevAnz+BQSfD2hLRA0bPgkcFa91kwHfcwZ zz/+hszqSbZNbGM1SqNHmCrtpKJ5XkfL7pMGQiJD8hnDZJXSAyU0P18X7x5cMClzEz Ea6zoHA5pzdU39iZMXjpWGQJ3wwC7FBpwdIBrO1EP6jkeESGqn9ghlHK0k3OQdsV1g 9XUjo4T1ek+Xk9/nAoWeTXMlZi0qQ0Gs+PZCmNG1i+1bdjjacERC9C61rNU81WDiD1 4kvmXk4jiRUkg==
Received: from [192.168.1.115] ([71.163.188.115]) by resomta-ch2-16v.sys.comcast.net with ESMTPSA id QwZDjUEKwJr4fQwZFjHSFW; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 17:20:25 +0000
X-Xfinity-VAAS: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrgeehgdduuddtucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuvehomhgtrghsthdqtfgvshhipdfqfgfvpdfpqffurfetoffkrfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefuvfhfhffkffgfgggjtgesrgdtreertdefjeenucfhrhhomhepofhitghhrggvlhcuufhtlfhohhhnshcuoehmshhtjhhohhhnshestghomhgtrghsthdrnhgvtheqnecukfhppeejuddrudeifedrudekkedrudduheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhephhgvlhhopegludelvddrudeikedruddrudduhegnpdhinhgvthepjedurdduieefrddukeekrdduudehpdhmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhsthhjohhhnhhssegtohhmtggrshhtrdhnvghtpdhrtghpthhtohepihgvthhfuddtkehplhgrnhhnihhnghesihgvthhfrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepihgvthhfsehivghtfhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehjrgihsehivghtfhdrohhrgh
X-Xfinity-VMeta: sc=0.00;st=legit
To: Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, ietf108planning@ietf.org
References: <ca4cb8af-520a-5591-736d-ec8e812479d5@comcast.net> <00E686E5-C058-4CE4-962B-3D234BE0394F@ietf.org>
From: Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <a087c0ef-29dd-129c-fd56-e407b189a754@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 13:20:15 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <00E686E5-C058-4CE4-962B-3D234BE0394F@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------9EEDA644B415338AF30DC51E"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf108planning/xqfg0-mATV14aAkgsk-RYk9sxLw>
Subject: Re: [Ietf108planning] Assessment criteria for decision on in-person/virtual IETF 108
X-BeenThere: ietf108planning@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf108planning.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf108planning>, <mailto:ietf108planning-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf108planning/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf108planning@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf108planning-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf108planning>, <mailto:ietf108planning-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 17:20:32 -0000

On 4/17/2020 5:44 PM, Jay Daley wrote:
> Mike
>
>> On 18/04/2020, at 9:35 AM, Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Jay/Stewart -
>>
>> A piece of the puzzle may be the availability and cost of medical 
>> travel insurance.   For grins I just priced the cost of insurance 
>> based on having the November IETF either in London or Bangkok and it 
>> came out about $60 for either of those destinations.    The benefit 
>> included things like a $1M coverage of medical evacuations and a 
>> $150K non-medical evacuation.
>>
>> Adding to the list of criteria Jay posted earlier - maybe 
>> "Availability of affordable medical insurance with no exclusions for 
>> the destination including any related to Covid-19"?
>
> That was raised during our internal discussions and we rejected the 
> idea as it is too difficult to assess the cost for people travelling 
> from all of the countries that participants come from.  Let me know if 
> you can see a way around that.
>
> Jay
>
> -- 


Hi Jay -

Have you considered reaching out to the IETF's and ISOC's insurance 
companies to ask them about this?   I'd think they'd have a good grasp 
of rates around the world or know where to get them.  Alternately, ask 
them if they'd be willing to issue medical insurance travel plans for 
the IETF meeting attendees or can refer to an underwriter who would?

I don't know if any of this is viable, but it may suggest some ways to 
calm fears for whatever the next in public meeting turns out to be.

Later, Mike