IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Wed, 05 April 2017 16:01 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 782201293FD for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 09:01:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.697
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.697 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.796, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N0gt0XEzbe0Y for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 09:01:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gproxy10.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy10-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.20.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95C5E1273E2 for <mtgvenue@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 09:01:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmgw2 (unknown [10.0.90.83]) by gproxy10.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA7CB1452DB for <mtgvenue@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 09:56:14 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmgw2 with id 4fwB1v0122SSUrH01fwEuL; Wed, 05 Apr 2017 09:56:14 -0600
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=LIwWeNe9 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:17 a=N659UExz7-8A:10 a=xqWC_Br6kY4A:10 a=AzvcPWV-tVgA:10 a=UQd1kSyfTPzwHNIgd8UA:9 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 a=17fRsRAw95QA:10
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=SoTmu7mQQluRYK7s+KHJ45INr8S8KeZtxPByUTFEvCM=; b=04sjKIQ36tM/A/zwtJ6uMvQsix wVnLcMsg0cDRHxyR16+Ak9982fy93puNhTDzpjBXIwiPKNMkYd0tfdsHL9yZQyESa61htklp0Kqds 6HlSEUjepPrW8epxKGZh1j59L;
Received: from pool-100-15-84-20.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.84.20]:33590 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1cvnI3-0006nG-QD; Wed, 05 Apr 2017 09:56:11 -0600
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, "mtgvenue@ietf.org" <mtgvenue@ietf.org>
References: <37de22dc-04a4-f868-698e-cf03cd791957@cisco.com>
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Message-ID: <a1b4fb14-64ec-2848-91e7-faa93ba6e697@labn.net>
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2017 11:56:07 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <37de22dc-04a4-f868-698e-cf03cd791957@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 100.15.84.20
X-Exim-ID: 1cvnI3-0006nG-QD
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-84-20.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([IPv6:::1]) [100.15.84.20]:33590
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 9
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mtgvenue/abbAPKqVbGHaOZ45L-OTeg8t7Vk>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory
X-BeenThere: mtgvenue@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for email discussion of the IAOC meeting venue selection process." <mtgvenue.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mtgvenue/>
List-Post: <mailto:mtgvenue@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2017 16:01:28 -0000

Eliot/All,


On 4/5/2017 9:40 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
> The economics of the Venue allow the meeting to be...
Is this going to be moved to a "desired" category? If so, the next
comment doesn't apply.

If not, was the agreement in the room really that it is okay for the
IAOC to select a location that is known well in advance to result in a
net loss?

Lou

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email