Re: [Mtgvenue] [admin-discuss] Consultation on IETF Meeting venue assessment

[Lou Berger <[e-mail]>]

Eliot, Dhruv,

Thank you so much for your comments, I completely agree with them. I had to go reread the RFC to verify my memory was not wrong given the degree of differences in announcement and what I thought had been agreed to.

Lou

________________________________

On February 4, 2021 3:18:35 AM Eliot Lear <lear=[e-mail]> wrote:

To add, one of the requirements is wheelchair accessibility.  Now… perhaps this is a given, these days, and so it’s not worth mentioning, but I did note its absence.  Personally I wouldn’t complain if you applied a more general ADA-like requirement, but that isn’t what the doc says, for reasons quite honestly I don’t remember.

Also, on human rights, there was a strong consensus at the time to not choose venues based on such a matter.

This is captured in the following non-objective:

   Politics:
      Endorsing or condemning particular countries, political paradigms,
      laws, regulations, or policies.


Our requirements are stated in terms of safety and/or security of the attendees, the likelihood of the ability of people to get to and from the venue, and the ability of attendees to have unimpeded Internet access. This may seem like a subtle difference, but the language of our requirements excludes HR so that it is clear we are not making a political statement by including or excluding a venue.  To do otherwise has implications for how the IETF is perceived, which itself might limit support for, and participation in, our community in ways we would wish it hadn’t.

Eliot


On 4 Feb 2021, at 07:55, Jay Daley <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

Thank you Dhruv, I understand the error now. I will log this as an issue and amend the assessment form.

Jay

--
Jay Daley
IETF Executive Director


On 4/02/2021, at 6:36 PM, Dhruv Dhody <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:


Hi Jay,

I agree with Stephen/Eliot. IMHO the "Internet Access" in RFC 8718 is not fully aligned with the "Internet Freedom Score" at freedomhouse.org<http://freedomhouse.org/>. For one, RFC 8718 focuses on filtering on means of communication whereas freedomhouse seems to focus on content filtering.

Looking at the map link - https://freedomhouse.org/explore-the-map?type=fotn&year=2019, we don't have any country but Japan that meets the criteria in Asia. So, no Bangkok, Singapore, or Seoul! And not sure how the city/venue exception may override the mandatory criteria! Maybe that can be clarified. We should look for sources that focus more on the means of Internet Access more closely aligned to RFC 8718? In the absence of which, perhaps this should be a subjective judgment call.

Thanks!
Dhruv

On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 4:32 AM Jay Daley <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Hi Eliot

On 3/02/2021, at 9:47 AM, Eliot Lear <lear=[e-mail]<mailto:lear=[e-mail]>> wrote:

Signed PGP part
Hi Jay,

I am uncomfortable with what I am reading.  The criteria you have listed don’t seem to me to be well correlated to RFC 8718.

Each of the criteria is taken directly from RFC 8718, though with simplified language, and is marked as to whether that is a mandatory or important criteria in RFC 8718.  If the language simplification is a problem then please let me know.

 Is it your intent to update 8718?

No.  The intent is that RFC 8718 contains such requirements as that for "Internet Access", which we need to turn into an objective, fair and repeatable assessment process.  This is attempting to do that.  If you think we have misinterpreted the criteria then please let me know.

 The goal is to have a successful meeting.  We have done so at two venues that your assessment criteria would reject, and conceivably do so in India and Mexico, which your criteria would also reject.

In order to address any issue here I need detail - can you please specify why you think India and Mexico would be rejected using this assessment and how that indicates failings in the assessment?

cheers
Jay


Eliot



--
Jay Daley
IETF Executive Director
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>




--
admin-discuss mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/admin-discuss
--
admin-discuss mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/admin-discuss