Re: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir telechat review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-12

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Mon, 05 February 2018 11:37 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 180E412AF83; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 03:37:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 5uI2du2c_tt4; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 03:37:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3889F1201F2; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 03:37:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4093; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1517830651; x=1519040251; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=FiqVGiMDEe//3VTQ0fSIdtsPYGWIMv4n/JJc8/ymjck=; b=mefaeZnps6ohttUkXZ5zO1YCZKI2v4JRH0KSN5rRF/I/BcxsFNZ6xb5l 422VdfWNTPZ9TAF4JEbDRXOEZgZkQPwSCHqK+LNPCGk5TFggnxonDEqBs /m9JvCWetaKrdP2tln36GrxShbrgEYUQ0A6+T+z0qrhnlfhbg4uDy3m9A 0=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 488
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0ByAQDKQHha/xbLJq1cGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYQ3cIQNixiPO5lgBwMfhRwCgx4UAQEBAQEBAQECayiFIwEBAQMBI1YFCwsYKgICVwYBDAgBAYopCMAXgieBQoM+g3KCBgEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQ4KBYRqhVQpgwWDLwKFCIJlBaQlhGKCMoEFjViCHooZJodajW2GUoM3gTw2IoFQMxoIGxWDBIMJgW1BjnUBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.46,464,1511827200"; d="asc'?scan'208"; a="1865835"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Feb 2018 11:37:29 +0000
Received: from [10.61.210.146] ([10.61.210.146]) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w15BbSxp009895; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 11:37:29 GMT
To: Stewart Bryant <stewart@g3ysx.org.uk>, rtg-dir@ietf.org
Cc: mtgvenue@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process.all@ietf.org
References: <151782868264.5731.15496399706573021777@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <9ac4f61b-96b9-8b06-a507-9402e15e7bc6@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2018 11:37:27 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <151782868264.5731.15496399706573021777@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="bfq5MhJ2Lc8lB895pDXS6AX4Dl7NwdMqO"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/eMpoSSD6jVm3s3pfG5kfoRU2SNc>
Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir telechat review of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-12
X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Directorate <rtg-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-dir/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2018 11:37:34 -0000

Hi Stewart,

I will let Pete or Charles address other comments.  As to these:


On 05.02.18 11:04, Stewart Bryant wrote:
>  A description of how reconsideration currently takes
>    place is found in <https://iaoc.ietf.org/meetings-
>    committee/documents/IETF-VenueSelectionID-
>    ContingencyPlanningFlowChart-2016.pdf>.
>
> SB> Maybe it is my finger trouble, but I could not access this
> rather unfriendly multi-line URL. I get a 404 error, and when I
> edit the URL to remove the %20s that show up in my browser
> I get "authentication required".

I confirm that this is a problem, and I have contacted the IAOC and AMSL
to see what can be done about it.

> Editorials/Nits:
>
> In the abstract the terms IASA and IAOC should be spelled out. This is part of
> a wider problem of the various I* abbreviations that are scattered through the
> text not being particularly user friendly. It would be helpful to the reader to
> provide a small glossary early in the text.

I would prefer that we not create a glossary.  I will leave to the RFC
Editor to help me on style with expansions, if that's okay.
>
>  ====
>
>  o  It MUST be possible to provision Internet Access to the Facility
>       and IETF Hotels that allows local attendees to utilize the
> SB> When I first read this I though you meant local as in those
> SB> who live in the country, but I think you mean those at the facility.
> SB> Clarification may be useful.

I think this becomes clear in the following sentence.
>
> ====
>
>    o  There are sufficient places (e.g., a mix of hallways, bars,
>       meeting rooms, and restaurants) for people to hold ad hoc
>       conversations and group discussions in the combination of spaces
>       offered by the facilities, hotels and bars/restaurants in the
>       surrounding area, within walking distance (5-10').
>
> SB> I imagine you mean 5-10 minutes not 5-10 feet.

I've expanded this out in my working copy.

>
> ====
>
>    o  Overflow Hotels can be placed under contract, within convenient
>       travel time of the Facility and at a variety of guest room rates.
> SB> s/of/to and from/
>

Ok.

These changes are in my working copy.  Whether there will be a new
version prior to proceeding to the RFC Editor is not my call but the
AD's.  In any case, I will see that they are addressed.

Eliot