Re: [Mtgvenue] [HT-rt] HR-RT Review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process

Andrew Sullivan <> Sun, 22 April 2018 22:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A902F124BE8; Sun, 22 Apr 2018 15:05:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.b=KABJtBBD; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.b=CjFyhkc6
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VLsZxIroidn3; Sun, 22 Apr 2018 15:05:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0B3F1200F1; Sun, 22 Apr 2018 15:05:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 645C9BECAC; Sun, 22 Apr 2018 22:05:15 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=default; t=1524434715; bh=0oeb1OCazYET22HjeJR98GjPCYOq5fYUPCgwbRnGj8A=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=KABJtBBD6KrucJz5IzhFjJ4TgVKRyKHRkuExFaFkdGRha+R0sl6u+dX3KuBkrHfle cIEe1Jl9ArGjPFJm0pPMVHUNqyCF8o7pe9UaiV2c6DU8LPq1xQyiCiUz1esoqhqJ/S Sif0UC9/TE7i7g86G+iJToEM/aDOqkde7PRY2q64=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IQ_ymMsM4P8E; Sun, 22 Apr 2018 22:05:13 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 18:05:13 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=default; t=1524434713; bh=0oeb1OCazYET22HjeJR98GjPCYOq5fYUPCgwbRnGj8A=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=CjFyhkc6eFUO4BUhIz/YLw8KdBwRoxP7fwOamUjZnc3sHGGlQOkEakucGJsVGUMSw PIcd8hdkBZr8kN4H+9IYRTwDJSOl4QfuqHtyhskqq+EJplihMc4cKFywW1n7pKfZtM vBlpiURUzuMAJ6j7+yWrFFjPd42LbOQtpzlVNuH8=
From: Andrew Sullivan <>
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] [HT-rt] HR-RT Review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 22:05:50 -0000

Dear colleagues,

On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 05:38:16PM +0200, Beatrice Martini wrote:
> > 3.2.2 would be nice, also because asking hotels/venues for this also
> > would prompt them to include it in their renovation plans.
> Unless a country's legislation is specifically against this use of public
> facilities, this should not be too difficult to require/provide.
> A venue does not need to have restrooms already designated to be used as gender
> neutral facilities.

I do not exactly object to adding this criterion to section 3.2
somewhere, but I hope people understand what it means.  Items in that
section are things that we want to have, but that we can trade away
against other considerations.  Moreover, anything that is missed in
that section must be included in the announcement of the venue.
Finally, the negotiators are instructed that anything that meets the
criteria in this section is highly desirable compared to other

I hope people are alert to the possibility that this would mean
trading off (say) affordability against the availability of gender
neutral facilities.

In any case, I think this does not belong in 3.2.2, which is about the
Venue, not the Facility or any IETF Hotel.  The Venue seems to wide to
talk about with this criterion.

I should note for the record that, while I am currently an IAOC member
(and its chair), I'm writing this in my capacity as a long participant
in the mtgvenue WG. 

Best regards,


Andrew Sullivan