Re: [Mtgvenue] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-daley-gendispatch-venue-requirements-01.txt

[Benson Muite <[e-mail]>]

Hi Eliot,
On 13/01/2024 11.27, Eliot Lear wrote:
> Hi Benson,
> 
> 
> That having been so stated, there is a niggling aspect of 8719 that I
> think does deserve some consideration: IMHO there is an emerging
> tradeoff that does need to be considered:
> 
>   * Sharing the travel pain, as we do today;
>   * Environmental impact of meeting at a particular locale;
>   * Overall cost to both the IETF and individuals
> 
Having a list of essential and desirable characteristics is helpful.
This is partially there, but is perhaps not comprehensive enough to give
useful guidance for those proposing a meeting venue.  It is likely that
all desirable characteristics cannot be obtained at every venue, but
some balance could be obtained over different venues.
> atrocious.  It's pretty much a trifecta.  But imagine a locale that
> takes the environment quite seriously, where power, for instance, is
> generated through solar, geothermal, etc, where the meeting costs are
> low, but getting there is a bit of a trick.  A good example might be
> Montevideo, UY.  Now of course any locale has to be able to provide
> appropriate meeting space and Internet connectivity and be safe, but
> then at least there should be a discussion.
> 
It would be great if new places such as Montevideo could be considered.
Suggestions to ensure a successful meeting in such places should be
made, in particular ensuring meaningful and long lasting participation
from people new to the IETF.
> 
>> This is helpful. Non-financial barriers to travel such as visas are also
>> important, as is travel time.
> 
> The issue of visas is already implicitly incorporated in requirements. 
> If a large percentage of participants can't get to a venue because of
> likely visa problems, then we should not go there.
> 
As these typically depend on the passport one holds, some effort should
be made to ensure this pain is also distributed.