Re: [Mtgvenue] Comments on draft-baker-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-02

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

Dear IAOC,

G'day.

I'm currently acting as document editor for this effort and am looking 
to get closure on pending items for the effort.

For this note, there's a question that was put to the IAOC:


On 6/22/2016 6:49 AM, Alissa Cooper wrote:
> = Section 3.3.4 =
>
> "The Guest Rooms at the IETF hotel(s) are sufficient in number to
>       house 1/3 or more of projected meeting attendees.  [Mandatory]"
>
> Personally I would be interested in hearing from the IAOC about the
> extent to which the pool of potential sites would be broadened if we
> were to relax or do away with this requirement. From the outside this
> seems like a limiting factor in the site selection, one that other
> meetings/conferences don't feel the need to adhere to, and one that
> isn't motivated by a compelling enough rationale to make it mandatory (convenience
> doesn't quite count, IMO). With our meetings running for 10 hours per
> day and increased ability to find overflow hotels with reasonable
> Internet access, does this still need to be mandatory?



Thanks.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net