Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be mandatory (was: Re: issue #3: Too many mandatory)
Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 18 April 2017 19:58 UTC
Return-Path: <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
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 F10B6131475 for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:58:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 aovdL-9pZa77 for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:58:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x233.google.com (mail-qk0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 593D4129442 for <mtgvenue@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:58:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x233.google.com with SMTP id h67so3481681qke.0 for <mtgvenue@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:58:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LYRd8GXs2DNpN444XnxrQ4ybcUM4dUK6+S453zqCq3s=; b=NbpKiaAIhXDewVVxSMuVZ0/oniwgY5AA8UmG4Gvbkn2Nk6jO9x0+zn6stgERZdX1Iu sAYI/hKstRnSfGdDjxsobwsD6+jd2FjpBFFBXo2lxTyWG0o24DVUD8v5nWRxIIyqHyIq oRaFa/tVyr3+vJ/AHkOop/szcnH88IGKVNutBjuDPf62ePlNJ/ec/26OG2+9SLdR5VsR LT0vwB880Eta9chYP5CP8Io64E/dVR8sEsj/B2REb8ilIOF6NbntsZxGK82v88MGQ7+L L++errnVe3rFBpgH3rz91jvL34Uz+zzoStV6BJOyzJl8ksBS0Ty54kHdQXg0r4swzDL7 PIXQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LYRd8GXs2DNpN444XnxrQ4ybcUM4dUK6+S453zqCq3s=; b=P2e7e1TS2CFDZ8HbxuP5hA5JOfkudgQ7/IXnP7t4TVLUOs4erbcz4y4CW7EcY2gHDr 9A9WsLqJaNy1+jSVsFVYDvC/FqimwPaYsk6vDb21exNhUKP1Rjzt7TM0IQGLNLmPx4V3 OK97BJDvvtfEthMT35pNxERPgVHw5pbWeLSmSR+bCQNaYnc+fTFdvMps49uQIvNhDbrA /IxF3sI4FJKHSYf7E0XIDrfnmWxklV/YYpS0vv6rZPsR1BY32OWYkCpJxKUoLePuN0y5 er6jNXYW3GYNDch4AQB20Jmae1A6bfdB5a/lg+xAqtJbxHVeKhsWTF81/ZmjG3CDg9rd zIxQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/7GoAjX14bhrLLY9X5ev7SLICGfsdD2gSr7CViqMD7olvD4uDwh h+WyeFVjy8Xp39OtpNZZw1AJ3DXeGg==
X-Received: by 10.55.214.207 with SMTP id p76mr14328094qkl.101.1492545525243; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:58:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.200.56.157 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:58:14 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <D6DA3121-3365-4409-9DF1-8B761608DA11@gmail.com>
References: <37de22dc-04a4-f868-698e-cf03cd791957@cisco.com> <5CF8C201-00C4-4E07-BAB6-8CC5A30B54F5@cooperw.in> <7aba8a44-f1b8-b368-2b9a-91ad4bccfbcc@cisco.com> <D6DA3121-3365-4409-9DF1-8B761608DA11@gmail.com>
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:58:14 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMDa4rQfwW=-M4nEgd2GPSmB_2NbT0owZA7yhHdU3AuS7A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, "mtgvenue@ietf.org" <mtgvenue@ietf.org>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1149b0b6d7e58d054d765563"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mtgvenue/wWM4q6x7V9OWrgblyEVrjDNENBU>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be mandatory (was: Re: 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: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 19:58:48 -0000
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: > Both of those points assume we need some kind of Internet access that > others people on business travel don’t. > I think this varies a good bit. Some of our communication back to our companies is bog standard business traveler stuff; some of our communications among ourselves or our devices is not. A network that allows WebRTC media and data channels to flow without TURN servers is better for our remote participants, for example, and that may be a consideration for the typical business traveler. We also have IETF network users who are more likely to engage in direct network management (or management of network devices) than would be common. A tight firewall will hinder their ability to do that, and result in them spending time on fiddling with that rather than contributing. I agree that "unfiltered and unmodified" may be difficult to assure when nation states may change their laws, but I think it is reasonable for us to require that this be unfiltered and unmodified *by the venue's own actions*. The larger question of what to do when meeting in a place all of whose facilities are required to implement such filtering likely belongs in a different requirement. Just my two cents, Ted
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Lou Berger
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Lou Berger
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Fred Baker
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Lou Berger
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Lou Berger
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Pete Resnick
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Pete Resnick
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Lou Berger
- [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be mandat… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Yoav Nir
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Jim Martin
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Ted Hardie
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Fred Baker
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Tobias Gondrom
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Yoav Nir
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Ted Hardie
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Ole Jacobsen
- Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be ma… Fred Baker
- [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Lou Berger
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Lou Berger
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Dave Crocker
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Dave Crocker
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Pete Resnick
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Ted Hardie
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Dave Crocker
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Ted Hardie
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Dave Crocker
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Warren Kumari
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Ted Hardie
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Lou Berger
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Pete Resnick
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Ted Hardie
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Lou Berger
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Pete Resnick
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Dave Crocker
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Dave Crocker
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Dave Crocker
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Pete Resnick
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Dave Crocker
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Eliot Lear
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Alissa Cooper
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Alissa Cooper
- Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory Fred Baker