Re: [Mtgvenue] document status, the role of the iaoc, and enforceability

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Hi Lou,

Yes, there is this indirection with NOMCOM.  Having a voice is
important.  I don't really know the composition of the meetings
committee, but it seems to me that perhaps that is a place for a certain
amount of diversity so that concerns can be identified early.  Maybe
it's just me, but when I consider a question like, “should the IETF meet
in a certain location?” my first question is, would I be comfortable
with my wife or daughter present?  In other words, I personalize it.  I
would expect others do something similar, if only subconsciously.  Had
Ted been a member of that committee, I'm sure we never would have been
standing there in BA in that uncomfortable situation, even if the
decision were STILL to go to Singapore (Ted's better at this than me- he
can put himself in many people's shoes).

Eliot

On 1/6/17 6:19 PM, Lou Berger wrote:
> Eliot,
>
> On 1/6/2017 11:40 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> IETF leadership tends to use BCPs as a means of enforcement.  That can't
>> be the case with this document.  It simply is impracticable to rework
>> contracts based on some sort of appeal, for instance.  At best,
>> therefore, this is the IETF community's advice to the IAOC about how it
>> would like venues selected.  At the end of the day, if members of the
>> community are unhappy with the IAOC's venue selections, the appropriate
>> recourse is the NOMCOM and not some sort of appeal.  I would like this
>> further clarified in the document.
> I'm not sure how viable this is for a specific meeting, but that's not
> to say that there can't be some longer term/process impact via the
> nomcom path.
>
> I have a little experience with trying this path.  The announcement of
> the 2016 venues was the straw that made me volunteer for the IAOC and I
> got appointed ~2 years ago.  Even then it was too late for me to have
> any impact on changing Singapore as a venue (my objections were based on
> expense and IETF 100 relevance, not the objection which I was unaware of
> that was raised by the community) .
>
> That said, I do believe I've been able to have some impact on meeting
> selection as an IAOC member -- specifically promoting the idea of repeat
> locations for cost benefits, (somewhat) improving transparency, and
> initiating the draft with the personal objective of ensuring that the
> venue selection process follows a community driven/consensus process.
>
> Also, keep in mind that the IAOC is made up of mostly non-nomcom
> appointed members.
>
> Lou
>
>> Eliot
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mtgvenue mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue
> _______________________________________________
> Mtgvenue mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue
>