Re: [IAOC] [IAB] Request for community guidance on issue concerning a future meeting of the IETF
On Sep 18, 2009, at 4:44 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: On 2009-09-19 08:08, Fred Baker wrote: On Sep 18, 2009, at 12:29 PM, Henk Uijterwaal wrote: I think it is safe to assume that the government did run some checks on what the IETF is doing The government has been negotiating to bring an IETF meeting to China since 1997, and has been very carefully vetting the IETF's activities for a long time. U betcha they know what we're doing. Up to *at least* the level of a Vice Minister of the PRC Government, from my personal knowledge. Roughly the same level as the US Government's direct contact with the IETF, also from my personal knowledge. There is nothing sinister there; we should be flattered. However, I have a question to the IAOC: do we know if other standards meetings such as 3GPP had to sign similar conditions before meeting in the PRC? Dear Brian; Please note that we would not be signing these conditions. The host would be. We were told that these conditions apply to all conferences, without exception. Whether or not other conferences have the same level of transparency as we do (i.e., whether the organizing committees know about these formal restrictions, and communicate them to their attendees), I do not know. Regards Marshall Brian ___ IAOC mailing list i...@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iaoc ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: [IAOC] [IAB] Request for community guidance on issue concerning a future meeting of the IETF
On 2009-09-19 08:08, Fred Baker wrote: > > On Sep 18, 2009, at 12:29 PM, Henk Uijterwaal wrote: > >> I think it is safe to assume that the government did run some checks >> on what the IETF is doing > > The government has been negotiating to bring an IETF meeting to China > since 1997, and has been very carefully vetting the IETF's activities > for a long time. U betcha they know what we're doing. Up to *at least* the level of a Vice Minister of the PRC Government, from my personal knowledge. Roughly the same level as the US Government's direct contact with the IETF, also from my personal knowledge. There is nothing sinister there; we should be flattered. However, I have a question to the IAOC: do we know if other standards meetings such as 3GPP had to sign similar conditions before meeting in the PRC? Brian ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: [IAOC] [IAB] Request for community guidance on issue concerning a future meeting of the IETF
On Sep 18, 2009, at 12:29 PM, Henk Uijterwaal wrote: I think it is safe to assume that the government did run some checks on what the IETF is doing The government has been negotiating to bring an IETF meeting to China since 1997, and has been very carefully vetting the IETF's activities for a long time. U betcha they know what we're doing. ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: [IAOC] [IAB] Request for community guidance on issue concerning a future meeting of the IETF
> From: Ole Jacobsen > ONE of the reasons a meeting is being proposed in China is that the > IETF now has a significant number (and growing) of Chinese > participants A meeting in China makes a certain amount of sense, but there are inevitably going to be side-issues. > for reasons beyond our control, many of them are having difficulties > obtaining visas to visit the United States when we have IETF > meetings here. Do they have any difficulty getting into Hong Kong? Noel ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: [IAOC] [IAB] Request for community guidance on issue concerning a future meeting of the IETF
John,
Since both you and I have attended meetings in China, as recently as 3
weeks ago, I think you will agree that the host --- any host --- has
a significant investment in effort, people and funds along with a
great deal of pride and determination that the meeting run
"perfectly." Given all that, I would find it very surprising that the
host would allow a random hotel employee, or anyone else for that
matter, to pull the eject lever to use your term. I also very much
doubt that government officials (if we assume they will be present)
are looking for an excuse to throw us out and shut the meeting down.
Perhaps if this was a Greenpeace conference, but it's not.
This isn't to say that I "agree" with the conditions, just that I feel
fairly confident that an IETF meeting running "normally" would not
find itself running afoul of any of these rules.
I would also like to remind everyone that ONE of the reasons a meeting
is being proposed in China is that the IETF now has a significant
number (and growing) of Chinese participants and for reasons beyond
our control, many of them are having difficulties obtaining visas to
visit the United States when we have IETF meetings here.
Ole
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, John C Klensin wrote:
> Marshall,
>
> Since seeing your note, I've been trying to figure out how to
> formulate my concern. Carsten's note captured it for me, so let me
> be a little more specific.
>
> First, thanks for asking.
>
> I am deliberately not addressing the "where else could we meet where
> things would be better" question, the visa issues, or any of the
> other logistical questions in this note.
>
> Let's assume (at least for purposes of argument -- I assume some
> members of the community might disagree) that we can trust the
> government of the PRC to be sensible in this sort of matter, to
> understand what an IETF meeting implies, etc. The difficulty is
> that, from things I've heard informally, the proposed Host
> ("Client") isn't the government or a government body.
>
> I am concerned that, if there is some incident --completely
> unrelated to IETF-- that someone associated with the host or hotel
> might overreact and decide to interpret, e.g., a discussion about
> mandatory-to-implement cryptography, as pushing too close to the
> "politics" or "criticism" line. I'd be much less concerned if any
> perceived incident led to some sort of conversation between "us" and
> relevant government folks about real issues and boundaries than if
> (and I assume this is an exaggeration) some middle-level hotel
> employee could panic and pull the eject lever.
>
> john
>
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
