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

Spencer Dawkins at IETF <> Thu, 13 September 2018 05:38 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D2E2130DC1 for <>; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 22:38:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b_JVxpIyQTrC for <>; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 22:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CC41130DC0 for <>; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 22:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id y134-v6so695423ywg.1 for <>; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 22:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/xQ4jg3KVwr/O97U3mp98Y8KPbMut+dR1eZC2lesDIA=; b=jXkTQF9szsg1tldRJn9zwcySX983nQN1CRwOMRhJv0WojELRS4yFJ6DRqaDaBxpXRJ HfT5mjAblktqKHfvnwzvBmCgGPPr+5YHgl2rXYZum7xxXXoX6D3Iva8s6ZPLNYNTwzGh UMa6ymaNdE1kW8BZcvCbIx24HJyLxQ3GBIpzlTmeNtUI0i2t09S7AgXgHhMPK9Cu8p7t G2xmOSZ6BpQzqsRZKjpjso8lwP0LpyhkXfvDd0DlPxo9UYNzY8BbYi9hIvSPMiMz+FOL gg/Q6HrKT/9qlWzy/LZUFXIricWnZlK8P6DKprQp9VM6bbBL2VDz0MqbydrSpj8JEsXh V78g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/xQ4jg3KVwr/O97U3mp98Y8KPbMut+dR1eZC2lesDIA=; b=ppzbBQ+3zreoGqeH3jDqcZZDSv4jDUGIDcR4SI9Yu9iIQIe6LavrIwuzMartUXpMAk l4bozxc80DUKz1GQkkt0VUhsS2a7agqrr4VlwWB/89GwDpOt2JyUDuUtk96xuMVHQkqI 8nG9hw6XJZ6xU/kfvSjr1VYXC8M4HRSLVfdOeudunHBJ9c51sfxECh/8j4ghXtv+uzcP rhs4GRFL5D1tDAzuBQZZ3sUlJkNPTz3VzEfKYzocw1ogD4US705s8kPAqB6RhW3Ew16a TVGVV2U/B0onONAwW/Ez5Oxuqr6ag/7a5iK78pltw+soJvIjG6i3OGYCsF+o6idburpO 54SA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51CDToBKCP5uN5WgMQ4Qo7YViesuceSV09FQ36U0ww4sX/aq8s1p wppKBHa70OTiE9Qf12vKNNvlVFVedmdYg3KJNLE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdbSRpGS/+JXl10Ta5NNIqAWMRQlWP5RIt/NDF2Pg4/c3Hnz/OCZLzDoVMGVzSqAJfCMWq2GbSIGaeyi+1toHv4=
X-Received: by 2002:a81:314f:: with SMTP id x76-v6mr2687865ywx.179.1536817132380; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 22:38:52 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <alpine.OSX.2.01.1808291846180.5588@ole-pro-2.local> <> <alpine.OSX.2.01.1808291954390.5588@ole-pro-2.local> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <11660.1536519177@localhost> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 00:38:39 -0500
Message-ID: <>
To: Brian E Carpenter <>
Cc: Michael Richardson <>,
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000042c1380575ba1f4f"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] Visa problems to Thailand -- tourism vs ED
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for email discussion of the IAOC meeting venue selection process." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 05:38:56 -0000

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 <> 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.