Re: [Manycouches] Daniel presentation @ 113

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Tue, 12 April 2022 20:07 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
X-Original-To: manycouches@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manycouches@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFC933A0687 for <manycouches@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 13:07:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.661
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.661 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 WfPjeMTccYpk for <manycouches@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 13:07:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.40]) (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 D852D3A0603 for <Manycouches@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 13:07:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.51]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D7EB549C7B; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 22:07:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id 2DE464EABB5; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 22:07:24 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 22:07:24 +0200
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>, Manycouches@ietf.org
Message-ID: <YlXb/CrYVsd9dEYE@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <7e716ee4-d243-1a1b-cd61-b2adb541350a@lear.ch> <0d87a7ba-b0dd-cffb-9a51-c02fd9ab8fc2@cs.tcd.ie>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0d87a7ba-b0dd-cffb-9a51-c02fd9ab8fc2@cs.tcd.ie>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manycouches/NBslgBWq51hLrehuj_-A00GgEvk>
Subject: Re: [Manycouches] Daniel presentation @ 113
X-BeenThere: manycouches@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for discussion of remote meeting attendance and virtual IETF meetings, as well as for SHMOO working group" <manycouches.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manycouches>, <mailto:manycouches-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manycouches/>
List-Post: <mailto:manycouches@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manycouches-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manycouches>, <mailto:manycouches-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 20:07:35 -0000

How do you think it could/should be taken into account ?

E.g.: i don't think we even had a chance to take
"average air travel time" into account in selecting IETF locations -
amongst all the other competing selection criterias.

At best it sounds as if we could accept more locations as
candidate locations, even if they are not e.g.: mayor hub airport
cities. We've done that some times times in the past: Maastricht,
Berlin, Hiroshima, Hawaii. So not sure if/how we could go any
further.

The way i understand it, the overwhelming limiter is the
conference hotel with many small meeting rooms and total number
of rooms desired. AFAIK, that is what had us exclude a higher variety
of locations. For example, Vienna only got back onto our agenda
because we knew we wouldn't have that many in-person attendants
this time that we would have had to go back to the conference
center - without attached hotel, which was not liked by many
attendants.

Cheers
     Toerless

On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 08:43:41PM +0100, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
> Apologies if this came up at the meeting (I've yet to look
> at the recording) but in addition to considering offsets I
> think it'd be good if we started to consider ease of access
> to meeting locations via train. We could start that by just
> describing potential train journeys to the meeting city and
> see if it turns into something people start to like. (So no
> need to mandate anything or modify meeting criteria RFCs to
> get started.)
> 
> It might not be so useful for some cities, but could be for
> others, e.g. train to Vienna may have been practical for a
> non-trivial number of in-person attendees perhaps. (It'd not
> be of much use for me, living on a small island off the edge
> of Europe as I do, which is a pity as train travel is a lot
> more pleasant than flying, but such is life;-)
> 
> Cheers,
> S.
> 






> _______________________________________________
> Manycouches mailing list
> Manycouches@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manycouches


-- 
---
tte@cs.fau.de