On 20 Sep 2009 17:07:06 -0000 John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote:
>>I think it should be considered that if such restrictions are acceptable
>>for on venue, once the precedent is set, it may well be requested again.
>
>Quite possibly, and I expect that should it happen, we'll debate the
>merits again.
>
>No venue is perfect, and any large country is going to have political
>issues.  People from several countries cannot get US visas, simply
>because of where they live, not anything they've done, but we seem
>willing to meet in the US anyway.  China is a large and sophisticated
>country, nothing we do is going to change that, and politically
>motivated boycotts far larger than anything the IETF could do have
>invariably been ineffective and often counterproductive.  Whatever
>small influence we might exert is going to be far greater if we meet
>and interact with the people who run the Chinese Internet.
>
I didn't for a moment consider that an IETF decision not to go would have 
any impact on the policies of the Chinese government.  I agree with you 
that it would not.

The question that was posed, as I understand it, was about the 
acceptability of the restrictions to the IETF.  If such restrictions are 
acceptable, then they should be acceptable anywhere.  I don't think China 
should get a free pass because it's China.

Scott K
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to