Re: [Mtgvenue] Was Brisbane a success to be repeated ?

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Mon, 25 March 2024 22:14 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
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 AE7EAC14F738 for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 15:14:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.66
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.66 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8BWNFbuD_eri for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 15:14:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:40]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E8E8C14F61F for <mtgvenue@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 15:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.51]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4V3RzM72x3znkS2; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 23:13:51 +0100 (CET)
Received: by faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id 4V3RzM5qQyzknCW; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 23:13:51 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 23:13:51 +0100
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Cc: mtgvenue@ietf.org
Message-ID: <ZgH3H4CNcUKjw0g4@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <ZgCdcWGzgESGxj8v@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <383149.1711340175@dyas>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <383149.1711340175@dyas>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mtgvenue/o9T4kfSdjjEQLMcVSJgZwZ1pROI>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] Was Brisbane a success to be repeated ?
X-BeenThere: mtgvenue@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for email discussion of the IETF 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: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 22:14:02 -0000

The asians i asked in general liked it because of much lower TZ differences.
But also observed lower attendance and hence potentially lower productivity of course.

I was primarily wondering if there was a formula like "we needed X more 'locals'
to show up than outside of australia, that's our criteria for success".

Cheers
    Toerless

On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 02:16:15PM +1000, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
>     > Sorry if subject question was asked and answered elswhere/earlier, please
>     > provide pointers to summary thereof. If not:
> 
>     > Who will atually determine if Brisbane was a success to be repeted, and if so how ?
> 
> LLC+IESG.
> 
>     > Btw: I very much enjoyed Brisbane, but i was privileged in having to fly in only
>     > from a location (SFO) that had a direct connection of <= 14 hours, whereas colleagues
>     > from further east in the Americas and of course in Europe did report total travel
>     > times even in excess of 30 hours. And i also managed to attach vacations to make
>     > the travel very much worthwhile. And i do collaborate a lot with folks from east asia,
>     > who of course also had a good presence.
> 
> I travelled for 38 hours.
> That included some dumb layovers in Toronto and a really long in Vancouver,
> probably as a result of the Dreamliner incident that Air NZ had two weeks
> ago.
> The flight from Toronto to Vancouver was actually the least pleasant of the
> three.
> 
>     > That's especially why i would like to understand best how much effort the IETF puts into
>     > deciding for this type of locations and especially how it will justify it to those for
>     > whom it was inacceptable due to these travel issues.
> 
> Endless discussion.
> 
> I think that the right people to ask are the asians.
> Was the trip from Tokyo or Nanjing or India significant more pleasant for you
> than when we for instance, meet in Prague or Philadelpha/Montreal?
> 
> Clearly, it is unpleasant for Europeans and east-coastians to get to
> Australia (or Bangkok).  But, it's also unpleasant for Australians to get to
> Montreal.
> 
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-                      *I*LIKE*TRAINS*



-- 
---
tte@cs.fau.de