Re: [Mtgvenue] Visa problems to Thailand -- tourism vs ED

[Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[e-mail]>]

To chime in late ... and after noting that we're not talking about a
document change on this ...

On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 3:34 PM Brian E Carpenter <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 2018-09-10 06:52, Michael Richardson wrote:
> >
> > 0) Lots of references to IASA in both
> draft-ietf-mtgvenue-meeting-policy-07
> >    and draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-16 reference
> >    IASA and IAOC.  Is there an AUTH48 plan to change these to LLC?
>
> As far as I know, "IASA" will still be a valid acronym after the
> transition to the LLC. But "IAOC" will need to be fixed. Personally
> I'm happy to consider that to be an editorial fix.
>
> > 1) I'm asking because maybe we need an additional AUTH48 change detailing
> >    what "visa requirements" means in section 3.2:
> >
> > Section 3.2 includes:
> >
> >       Travel barriers to entry, including visa requirements, are likely
> >       to be such that an overwhelming majority of participants who wish
> >       to do so can attend.  The term "travel barriers" is to be read
> >       broadly by the IASA in the context of whether a successful
> >       meeting can be had.
>
> That "likely" already makes it clear that there's a judgment call involved.
>
> <snip>
>
> > I'd like to see a paragraph basically saying that a mtgvenue criteria
> > is the ability to get a clear statement as to what the visa requirements
> > *are* for a specific meeting place.
>
> That seems reasonable. But why doesn't it apply to *all* "travel barriers"?
> (We had some discussion pre-Singapore about whether it was OK to arrive
> carrying prescribed medication.)
>

At the time I was making arrangements for Singapore, I happened to be on
one medication that was "must have permission to arrive carrying", and one
that was "leave this at home".

If I remember correctly, we were treated to a few people (like me) posting
"huh?", and a few people saying "no one looked at MY meds when I landed",
and a few people posting pointers to a relatively official-looking
medications list, that I could compare all of my meds against.

So, that last part was the difference for me - that conversation converged
at something like

   - there are rules
   - you aren't likely to be checked
   - if you care about being checked, here's where to check your meds list,
   and here's what to do if one or more of your meds is on that list.

ISTM that I'm hearing most of the current frustration because our shared
understanding of the situation in Bangkok isn't converging, the way
Singapore converged. It seems like there' a post about a new embassy with a
different story than the previous embassy about twice a week, and no
obvious signs of that changing anytime before December.

FWTW, of course.

Spencer