RE: So, where to repeat?

[Richard Shockey]

The tourist website www.minneapolis.org uses the slogan "City by Nature". 

I think "An infinitely more glamorous Frankfurt" would be an improvement.

[RS> ] If you prefer a globally dysfunctional airport and a city run by
bankers ..then yes its potentially more 'glamorous'.  Granted they do have a
world class Christmas Market in season.  If you want the center of Europe ..
Munchen. You could think about Berlin but then you have a totally non
existent disfunctional airport.  Wait a few years out and you can rethink
Washington DC. A totally functional 5 runway international airport .. a full
metro rail from the airport to the city and all of Washington's many
nonexistent charms. 

.

On Aug 10, 2012, at 10:01 PM, Richard Shockey wrote:

> Minneapolis is infinitely more glamorous Frankfurt .. 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf 
> Of Tim Bray
> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 12:30 PM
> To: Geoff Mulligan
> Cc: Dave Crocker; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: So, where to repeat?
> 
> Frankfurt as the Minneapolis of Europe: central, well-connected, cold, 
> unglamorous.  -T

Re: So, where to repeat?

[joel jaeggli]

On 8/10/12 9:30 AM, Tim Bray wrote:

Frankfurt as the Minneapolis of Europe: central, well-connected, cold,
unglamorous.  -T
Also home of the ECB and the Bundesbank which shows when you try to book 
a large event into the big hotels near the hauptbahnhof.


"The why have we not met in this large city which I think is more 
appropriate then some of our others choices" aspect of this thrice 
annual discussion seems a bit played out.

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Geoff Mulligan  wrote:

On 08/09/2012 09:17 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:

On Aug 9, 2012, at 6:07 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:


offlist.

Not so much


Geoff,

Frankfurt is a city in Germany.  I believe the IETF has never been there.

Two more tidbits:
   - It's a huge aviation hub. There are direct flights from everywhere,
similar to CDG, Heathrow, or Schiphol
   - Unlike Paris, London and Amsterdam, it's not a great tourist
attraction, so conceivably it would be cheaper.

I've found it relatively inexpensive, clean and very easy to get to.



Other than those two tidbits about it, I've no idea what is to be
accomplished by someone's randomly throwing out the names of cities for
a discussion like this, especially when threads like these always have a
great deal of trouble staying focused on the /principle/ rather than
haggling the details.

The principle would be to go to aviation hubs so as to minimize the
collective pain. Most people from the US going to Prague, would have a
connection in Frankfurt, so a meeting in Frankfurt would reduce the amount
of flights.

This is why I threw out a "not so random" city name - Frankfurt.


Yoav


On 8/8/2012 12:24 PM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

Frankfurt?



On Aug 8, 2012, at 12:49 PM, Dave Crocker  wrote:


On 8/8/2012 11:46 AM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

So then why not consider, London, Paris (not the Concorde Lafayette),
Frankfurt, Amsterdam?


shockingly, amsterdam can't handle the ietf.  wrong mix of resources.
really.

paris appears to have broad crime and work-ethic patterns that also are
problematic, not just at the concorde.

to be clear: i'm speaking for myself.

d/

--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net



--
   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net

Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Yoav Nir]

The tourist website www.minneapolis.org uses the slogan "City by Nature". 

I think "An infinitely more glamorous Frankfurt" would be an improvement.
.

On Aug 10, 2012, at 10:01 PM, Richard Shockey wrote:

> Minneapolis is infinitely more glamorous Frankfurt .. 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim
> Bray
> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 12:30 PM
> To: Geoff Mulligan
> Cc: Dave Crocker; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: So, where to repeat?
> 
> Frankfurt as the Minneapolis of Europe: central, well-connected, cold,
> unglamorous.  -T

RE: So, where to repeat?

[Richard Shockey]

Minneapolis is infinitely more glamorous Frankfurt .. 

-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim
Bray
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 12:30 PM
To: Geoff Mulligan
Cc: Dave Crocker; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: So, where to repeat?

Frankfurt as the Minneapolis of Europe: central, well-connected, cold,
unglamorous.  -T

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Geoff Mulligan  wrote:
>
> On 08/09/2012 09:17 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 9, 2012, at 6:07 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>>
>>> offlist.
>>
>> Not so much
>>
>>> Geoff,
>>>
>>> Frankfurt is a city in Germany.  I believe the IETF has never been
there.
>>
>> Two more tidbits:
>>   - It's a huge aviation hub. There are direct flights from 
>> everywhere, similar to CDG, Heathrow, or Schiphol
>>   - Unlike Paris, London and Amsterdam, it's not a great tourist 
>> attraction, so conceivably it would be cheaper.
>
> I've found it relatively inexpensive, clean and very easy to get to.
>>
>>
>>> Other than those two tidbits about it, I've no idea what is to be 
>>> accomplished by someone's randomly throwing out the names of cities 
>>> for a discussion like this, especially when threads like these 
>>> always have a great deal of trouble staying focused on the 
>>> /principle/ rather than haggling the details.
>>
>> The principle would be to go to aviation hubs so as to minimize the 
>> collective pain. Most people from the US going to Prague, would have 
>> a connection in Frankfurt, so a meeting in Frankfurt would reduce the 
>> amount of flights.
>
> This is why I threw out a "not so random" city name - Frankfurt.
>>
>>
>> Yoav
>>
>>> On 8/8/2012 12:24 PM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Frankfurt?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 8, 2012, at 12:49 PM, Dave Crocker  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/8/2012 11:46 AM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So then why not consider, London, Paris (not the Concorde 
>>>>>> Lafayette), Frankfurt, Amsterdam?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> shockingly, amsterdam can't handle the ietf.  wrong mix of resources.
>>>>> really.
>>>>>
>>>>> paris appears to have broad crime and work-ethic patterns that 
>>>>> also are problematic, not just at the concorde.
>>>>>
>>>>> to be clear: i'm speaking for myself.
>>>>>
>>>>> d/
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Dave Crocker
>>>>> Brandenburg InternetWorking
>>>>> bbiw.net
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>>   Dave Crocker
>>>   Brandenburg InternetWorking
>>>   bbiw.net
>>>
>>> Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.
>
>

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Ole Jacobsen]

On Fri, 10 Aug 2012, Tim Bray wrote:

> Frankfurt as the Minneapolis of Europe: central, well-connected, cold,
> unglamorous.  -T

Plus expensive and generally unsuitable for a meeting such as ours, 
until the day Bit's and Bites turns into a 200,000 square foot 
tradeshow, just kidding! :-)

I agree with the well-connected, it's my "main gateway" to Europe
these days, especially because of the great train service, getting
to Amsterdam for example is very easy.


Ole

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Tim Bray]

Frankfurt as the Minneapolis of Europe: central, well-connected, cold,
unglamorous.  -T

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Geoff Mulligan  wrote:
>
> On 08/09/2012 09:17 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 9, 2012, at 6:07 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>>
>>> offlist.
>>
>> Not so much
>>
>>> Geoff,
>>>
>>> Frankfurt is a city in Germany.  I believe the IETF has never been there.
>>
>> Two more tidbits:
>>   - It's a huge aviation hub. There are direct flights from everywhere,
>> similar to CDG, Heathrow, or Schiphol
>>   - Unlike Paris, London and Amsterdam, it's not a great tourist
>> attraction, so conceivably it would be cheaper.
>
> I've found it relatively inexpensive, clean and very easy to get to.
>>
>>
>>> Other than those two tidbits about it, I've no idea what is to be
>>> accomplished by someone's randomly throwing out the names of cities for
>>> a discussion like this, especially when threads like these always have a
>>> great deal of trouble staying focused on the /principle/ rather than
>>> haggling the details.
>>
>> The principle would be to go to aviation hubs so as to minimize the
>> collective pain. Most people from the US going to Prague, would have a
>> connection in Frankfurt, so a meeting in Frankfurt would reduce the amount
>> of flights.
>
> This is why I threw out a "not so random" city name - Frankfurt.
>>
>>
>> Yoav
>>
>>> On 8/8/2012 12:24 PM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

 Frankfurt?



 On Aug 8, 2012, at 12:49 PM, Dave Crocker  wrote:

>
> On 8/8/2012 11:46 AM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:
>>
>> So then why not consider, London, Paris (not the Concorde Lafayette),
>> Frankfurt, Amsterdam?
>
>
> shockingly, amsterdam can't handle the ietf.  wrong mix of resources.
> really.
>
> paris appears to have broad crime and work-ethic patterns that also are
> problematic, not just at the concorde.
>
> to be clear: i'm speaking for myself.
>
> d/
>
> --
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net


>>> --
>>>   Dave Crocker
>>>   Brandenburg InternetWorking
>>>   bbiw.net
>>>
>>> Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.
>
>

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Michael Richardson]

> "Ole" == Ole Jacobsen  writes:
Ole> On Wed, 8 Aug 2012, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

>> So I'm confused...  We're we talking about the possibility of 
>> sticking to one European city, one north American city and one Asian 
>> city and not picking various cities throughout the world.

Ole> Oh, I see. My reading was that we would focus on small number of 
Ole> cities in each region, especially since we cannot depend on ONE
Ole> being always available for our dates, host and sponsorship 
Ole> notwithstanding.

I understood what Ole did.
I think that over a decade, the small number would go from ~7 to perhaps
2 in each region.  That's because we'd wind up signing multi-year
contracts with hotels that we liked. (which is, I understand, why we
repeated in Minneapolis)

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Geoff Mulligan]

On 08/09/2012 09:17 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:

On Aug 9, 2012, at 6:07 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:


offlist.

Not so much


Geoff,

Frankfurt is a city in Germany.  I believe the IETF has never been there.

Two more tidbits:
  - It's a huge aviation hub. There are direct flights from everywhere, similar 
to CDG, Heathrow, or Schiphol
  - Unlike Paris, London and Amsterdam, it's not a great tourist attraction, so 
conceivably it would be cheaper.

I've found it relatively inexpensive, clean and very easy to get to.



Other than those two tidbits about it, I've no idea what is to be
accomplished by someone's randomly throwing out the names of cities for
a discussion like this, especially when threads like these always have a
great deal of trouble staying focused on the /principle/ rather than
haggling the details.

The principle would be to go to aviation hubs so as to minimize the collective 
pain. Most people from the US going to Prague, would have a connection in 
Frankfurt, so a meeting in Frankfurt would reduce the amount of flights.

This is why I threw out a "not so random" city name - Frankfurt.


Yoav


On 8/8/2012 12:24 PM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

Frankfurt?



On Aug 8, 2012, at 12:49 PM, Dave Crocker  wrote:



On 8/8/2012 11:46 AM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

So then why not consider, London, Paris (not the Concorde Lafayette), 
Frankfurt, Amsterdam?


shockingly, amsterdam can't handle the ietf.  wrong mix of resources. really.

paris appears to have broad crime and work-ethic patterns that also are 
problematic, not just at the concorde.

to be clear: i'm speaking for myself.

d/

--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net



--
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net

Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Michael Richardson]

> "Michael" == Michael Richardson  writes:
Michael> but please, not Paris in the summer... nor Orlando on
Michael> spring break)

ps: I'm really upset about Orlando in March.  We did that in back in
December 1998, and it seemed a failure to me.  Maybe this will be a
remote meeting for me. (go rps WG, go!!)

The hallways were WAY WAY too small for the people, thank god they
didn't serve the cookies there, and the social event... nice band, but
so loud, one couldn't talk to each other.

I understand that perhaps we won't be in the same conference centre, and
maybe NBC Universal will do a better job... but.

-- 
Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works 



pgpNKYCx7u144.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[John Levine]

>This is worth mentioning because the MY formal rule is not strict
>prohibition but a formal visa process that is so onerous as to equate to
>a prohibition.

Wouldn't that rule out the United States?  It is my impression that
getting a US visa for someone with a Cuban or Iranian passport is
effectively impossible.

R's,
John

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Peter Saint-Andre]

On 8/9/12 3:31 PM, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
> 
> We HAVE a requirements document.

Aha, so it's just that people at the mic haven't read the draft. That
never happens at one of our meetings, does it? ;-)

Unfortunately, I can't seem to find this requirements document in the
datatracker...

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Ole Jacobsen]

We HAVE a requirements document.

Ole

On Thu, 9 Aug 2012, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

> 
> Agreed.
> 
> Dare I say that we need a requirements document? ;-)
> 
> Peter
> 
> Peter Saint-Andre
> https://stpeter.im/
> 
> 
> 

RE: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)]

> > But, as soon as a country says "if you have a
> > passport from X, you aren't getting in, don't even bother to
> > apply for a visa", they should be off our list of possibilities.

It is sad to hear this. I actually never heard such restrictions for
people travelling to Turkey.

BTW: A lot of countries, including Israel, don't need a visa for Turkey.
For others it is technically a non-issue to get it at the border.

Beside many European cities there are direct flights to Istanbul from:
Los Angeles, Washington, Chicago, New York, Beijing, Tokyo, Seoul,
Bangkok, and Tel Aviv.

Cheers, 
Mehmet 


> -Original Message-
> From: ext Ole Jacobsen (ole) [mailto:o...@cisco.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 10:48 PM
> To: John C Klensin
> Cc: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon); Ersue, Mehmet (NSN -
DE/Munich); ext
> Geoff Mulligan; Richard Shockey; ietf@ietf.org; dcroc...@bbiw.net
> Subject: Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)
> 
> Yes, and sadly that rules out really good venues such as Kuala Lumpur,
quite possibly
> the least expensive (hotel wise) suitable location in Asia.
> 
> Ole J. Jacobsen
> Editor & Publisher
> http://cisco.com/ipj
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On 9 Aug 2012, at 13:42, "John C Klensin"  wrote:
> 
> > Let me say that a different way.  We sometimes have to tolerate
> > countries, like the US, who a fussy about visas or immigration
> > procedures for people coming from specific other countries.  I
> > wish we didn't.  But, as soon as a country says "if you have a
> > passport from X, you aren't getting in, don't even bother to
> > apply for a visa", they should be off our list of possibilities.
> >
> >   john
> >
> >
> > --On Thursday, August 09, 2012 22:22 +0200 "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN
> > - IL/Hod HaSharon)"  wrote:
> >
> >> Istanbul, Dubai, and similar places will not allow all of us
> >> in the community to participate in the meetings
> >>
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On
> >> Behalf Of Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)
> >> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 11:20 PM
> >> To: ext Geoff Mulligan; Ole Jacobsen
> >> Cc: ietf@ietf.org; dcroc...@bbiw.net; Richard Shockey
> >> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management
> >> granularity)
> >>
> >> Why not consider Istanbul? It's another nice harbor city.
> >>
> >> Has a series of world class hotels like Grand Hyatt, Hilton,
> >> InterContinental, Radisson Blu but also less expensive hotels,
> >> close to each other.
> >
> >
> >
> >

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Dave Crocker]

Yes, and sadly that rules out really good venues such as Kuala
Lumpur, quite possibly the least expensive (hotel wise) suitable
location in Asia.



The IAOC researched this recently, quite thoroughly; Ole and I are both
biased towards wanting it.  (I lived there for a year.)

This is worth mentioning because the MY formal rule is not strict
prohibition but a formal visa process that is so onerous as to equate to
a prohibition.

d/

--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Peter Saint-Andre]

On 8/9/12 2:42 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
> Let me say that a different way.  We sometimes have to tolerate
> countries, like the US, who a fussy about visas or immigration
> procedures for people coming from specific other countries.  I
> wish we didn't.  But, as soon as a country says "if you have a
> passport from X, you aren't getting in, don't even bother to
> apply for a visa", they should be off our list of possibilities.

Agreed.

Dare I say that we need a requirements document? ;-)

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Ole Jacobsen (ole)]

Yes, and sadly that rules out really good venues such as Kuala Lumpur, quite 
possibly the least expensive (hotel wise) suitable location in Asia.

Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor & Publisher
http://cisco.com/ipj

Sent from my iPhone

On 9 Aug 2012, at 13:42, "John C Klensin"  wrote:

> Let me say that a different way.  We sometimes have to tolerate
> countries, like the US, who a fussy about visas or immigration
> procedures for people coming from specific other countries.  I
> wish we didn't.  But, as soon as a country says "if you have a
> passport from X, you aren't getting in, don't even bother to
> apply for a visa", they should be off our list of possibilities.
> 
>   john
> 
> 
> --On Thursday, August 09, 2012 22:22 +0200 "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN
> - IL/Hod HaSharon)"  wrote:
> 
>> Istanbul, Dubai, and similar places will not allow all of us
>> in the community to participate in the meetings 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On
>> Behalf Of Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)
>> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 11:20 PM
>> To: ext Geoff Mulligan; Ole Jacobsen
>> Cc: ietf@ietf.org; dcroc...@bbiw.net; Richard Shockey
>> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management
>> granularity)
>> 
>> Why not consider Istanbul? It's another nice harbor city.
>> 
>> Has a series of world class hotels like Grand Hyatt, Hilton,
>> InterContinental, Radisson Blu but also less expensive hotels,
>> close to each other.
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[John C Klensin]

Let me say that a different way.  We sometimes have to tolerate
countries, like the US, who a fussy about visas or immigration
procedures for people coming from specific other countries.  I
wish we didn't.  But, as soon as a country says "if you have a
passport from X, you aren't getting in, don't even bother to
apply for a visa", they should be off our list of possibilities.

   john


--On Thursday, August 09, 2012 22:22 +0200 "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN
- IL/Hod HaSharon)"  wrote:

> Istanbul, Dubai, and similar places will not allow all of us
> in the community to participate in the meetings 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 11:20 PM
> To: ext Geoff Mulligan; Ole Jacobsen
> Cc: ietf@ietf.org; dcroc...@bbiw.net; Richard Shockey
> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management
> granularity)
> 
> Why not consider Istanbul? It's another nice harbor city.
> 
> Has a series of world class hotels like Grand Hyatt, Hilton,
> InterContinental, Radisson Blu but also less expensive hotels,
> close to each other.

RE: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)]

Istanbul, Dubai, and similar places will not allow all of us in the
community to participate in the meetings 


-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 11:20 PM
To: ext Geoff Mulligan; Ole Jacobsen
Cc: ietf@ietf.org; dcroc...@bbiw.net; Richard Shockey
Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

Why not consider Istanbul? It's another nice harbor city.

Has a series of world class hotels like Grand Hyatt, Hilton,
InterContinental, Radisson Blu but also less expensive hotels, close to
each other.

Cheers, 
Mehmet 

> -Original Message-
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of ext Geoff
> Mulligan
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 8:47 PM
> To: Ole Jacobsen
> Cc: Richard Shockey; dcroc...@bbiw.net; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)
> 
> So then why not consider, London, Paris (not the Concorde Lafayette),
Frankfurt,
> Amsterdam?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Aug 7, 2012, at 8:55 PM, Ole Jacobsen  wrote:
> 
> >
> > You said about Prague:
> >
> > "...[do] folks who live outside of that region not care about the
> > additional hop of travel to get to it?"
> >
> > This gets cited often, and I don't really understand why. There are
> > VERY few European cities that are reachable directly from the US (or
> > Asia for that matter). Most require transiting some kind of major
hub
> > (London, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam to name a few). There will
always
> > be exceptions, I am sure you can get to Stockholm directly from the
US
> > East Coast, but not from the West Coast. I am sure a very large
> > percentage of the IETF attendees from the US went through London or
> > Frankfurt (or a small number of alternatives) to get to Stockholm on
> > the two occasions when we met there.
> >
> > Since I travel to Norway on a more or less regular basis, I am used
to
> > (and quite happy to) go through Frankfurt or London, it's just a
fact
> > of life especially if you factor in the "preferred carrier"
(personal
> > or corporate). Prague may be an "extra hop," but depending on
> > schedules you might well get to your destination (hotel) just as
> > quickly as you would for getting from CDG to central Paris or LHR to
> > central London.
> >
> > If we restrict European cities to the ones with direct flight
> > connections from other continents, we're really limiting the
choices.
> > Let's be a little more realistic and consider actual travel "pain"
> > from the top hubs in Europe, assuming we can't (always) meet in
those
> > places.
> >
> > I do understand that the extra hop does add some cost, which is why
> > I always consider trains as a reasonable alternative, albeit not a
> > particularly fast one. For example, the cost for a First Class train
> > ticket from Frankfurt to Prague was 98 Euros. I am not suggesting
> > that this is always going to be a reasonable alternative, and I am
> > worried that the mere mention of "train" on this list may result in
> > a flame war, but still...
> >
> > Ole
> >
> >
> >
> > Ole J. Jacobsen
> > Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
> > Cisco Systems
> > Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
> > E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
> > Skype: organdemo
> >
> >

RE: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)]

Why not consider Istanbul? It's another nice harbor city.

Has a series of world class hotels like Grand Hyatt, Hilton,
InterContinental, Radisson Blu but also less expensive hotels, close to
each other.

Cheers, 
Mehmet 

> -Original Message-
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of ext Geoff
> Mulligan
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 8:47 PM
> To: Ole Jacobsen
> Cc: Richard Shockey; dcroc...@bbiw.net; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)
> 
> So then why not consider, London, Paris (not the Concorde Lafayette),
Frankfurt,
> Amsterdam?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Aug 7, 2012, at 8:55 PM, Ole Jacobsen  wrote:
> 
> >
> > You said about Prague:
> >
> > "...[do] folks who live outside of that region not care about the
> > additional hop of travel to get to it?"
> >
> > This gets cited often, and I don't really understand why. There are
> > VERY few European cities that are reachable directly from the US (or
> > Asia for that matter). Most require transiting some kind of major
hub
> > (London, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam to name a few). There will
always
> > be exceptions, I am sure you can get to Stockholm directly from the
US
> > East Coast, but not from the West Coast. I am sure a very large
> > percentage of the IETF attendees from the US went through London or
> > Frankfurt (or a small number of alternatives) to get to Stockholm on
> > the two occasions when we met there.
> >
> > Since I travel to Norway on a more or less regular basis, I am used
to
> > (and quite happy to) go through Frankfurt or London, it's just a
fact
> > of life especially if you factor in the "preferred carrier"
(personal
> > or corporate). Prague may be an "extra hop," but depending on
> > schedules you might well get to your destination (hotel) just as
> > quickly as you would for getting from CDG to central Paris or LHR to
> > central London.
> >
> > If we restrict European cities to the ones with direct flight
> > connections from other continents, we're really limiting the
choices.
> > Let's be a little more realistic and consider actual travel "pain"
> > from the top hubs in Europe, assuming we can't (always) meet in
those
> > places.
> >
> > I do understand that the extra hop does add some cost, which is why
> > I always consider trains as a reasonable alternative, albeit not a
> > particularly fast one. For example, the cost for a First Class train
> > ticket from Frankfurt to Prague was 98 Euros. I am not suggesting
> > that this is always going to be a reasonable alternative, and I am
> > worried that the mere mention of "train" on this list may result in
> > a flame war, but still...
> >
> > Ole
> >
> >
> >
> > Ole J. Jacobsen
> > Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
> > Cisco Systems
> > Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
> > E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
> > Skype: organdemo
> >
> >

Re: So, where to repeat?

[John C Klensin]

--On Thursday, August 09, 2012 11:55 -0700 Dave Crocker
 wrote:

>> This is why I threw out a "not so random" city name -
>> Frankfurt.
> 
> Indeed, random was the wrong word.  That word is often used
> incorrectly.   The correct word is "arbitrary".
> 
> It is frankly entirely arbitrary to suggest a particular city,
> in terms of the a directed discussion about the /approach/ of
> choosing cities.
> 
> It presumes that the existing processes haven't researched
> most choices for Europe, Asia, or North America.

Dave,

Without suggesting that Frankfurt has not been carefully
researched (I gather it has and have some personal experience
with meeting arrangements, not just individual visits that leads
me to agree with the conclusion, whether you approve of such
personal experiences or not), I don't think you can dismiss it
as either "random" or even "arbitrary".  

One of the major criteria that has often been suggested --I
think even by you-- is "major airline hub".   As far as I know,
there are four such hubs in Europe: London (where we have met
and are planning to meet again), Paris (where we have met),
Amsterdam (where we have met), and Frankfurt.  I would consider
Copenhagen, Munich (where we have met), and a few other places
as secondary hubs; YMMD.  

I think its being the only place on that first list where we
have not met makes "why not Frankfurt" an entirely reasonable
and actually highly focused and predictable question.  If he had
said "why not Köln-Bonn" or "why not Nice" or any of dozens of
other smaller, non-hub airports, "arbitrary" would have been in
order.  But "Frankfurt" is no more arbitrary than Chicago,
Dallas, or New York -- there may be perfectly good reasons to
avoid all three (although we have met in Chicago and Dallas),
but it seems to me that asking about _any_ airline hub city that
significant can certainly not be dismissed as "arbitrary".

john

RE: So, where to repeat?

[RJ Atkinson]

I haven't been at any IETF recently, but from my previous
experience, I agree with several commenters about these
cities:

* MINNEAPOLIS consistently works well for IETF meetings.


* VANCOUVER consistently works well for IETF meetings.


* DUBLIN has good air transport links, and would have 
  rated MUCH higher in many folks' views if only the 
  meeting either had been downtown (or in another part 
  of town with a range of hotel and restaurant options 
  to choose from). 

  I very much hope the IAOC will look into Dublin again, 
  but a meeting downtown or otherwise with a range of
  hotel and restaurant options.


* WASHINGTON DC worked well for several meetings in the
  1990s and would be worth re-examining.  It has very
  good air transport links, and the Metro Rail (subway)
  is being extended out west to Dulles International
  Airport.  [MetroRail to Reston/Wiehle Ave opens in 2013; 
  extending the last few miles from there to Dulles Airport
  is expected circa 2016.]


I also agree with several commenters about these 
more general meeting aspects:

* When I attend an IETF, I'm working, not playing tourist.  
  So I'm quite happy to meet someplace cold in winter or 
  someplace wet during rainy season -- provided one can 
  get around in a reasonable way.

* Tourist-oriented venues often ring alarm bells in the
  management approval processes for many organisations.
  As examples, meetings in Hawaii or Las Vegas (any time)
  likely will raise more management-approval questions 
  than meeting in Minneapolis during the local winter.

* Locations convenient (using public transport) to a major
  airline hub are preferable, given our global scope.


Separately, despite the best efforts of the IAOC (and 
their predecessors), it has been disappointing that most 
A/P region locations have been relatively expensive.


Yours,

Ran

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Dave Crocker]

On 8/9/2012 11:37 AM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

Frankfurt is a city in Germany.  I believe the IETF has never been

...

I've found it relatively inexpensive, clean and very easy to get to.


Ole's comment was reflecting secretariat and IAOC research.

Individual experience can be very misleading here.  Sometimes, yes, it 
can point to approaches that haven't been considered.  But the 
'sometimes' is meant as a polite way of saying 'almost never'.


As someone who has challenged the IETF's venue selection process 
vigorously for 20 years, I am forced to admit that any possible problems 
in the process seem to be strategic, not tactical.  I haven't seen any 
evidence that the current process obtains distorted data or makes silly 
decisions in the /details/ of researching or arranging a given city.


Anyone thinking otherwise needs to employ the full set of requirements 
for an IETF meeting, not merely a stray, isolated item, such as 
discounted hotel price.




Other than those two tidbits about it, I've no idea what is to be
accomplished by someone's randomly throwing out the names of cities for
a discussion like this, especially when threads like these always have a
great deal of trouble staying focused on the /principle/ rather than
haggling the details.

The principle would be to go to aviation hubs so as to minimize the
collective pain. Most people from the US going to Prague, would have a
connection in Frankfurt, so a meeting in Frankfurt would reduce the
amount of flights.

This is why I threw out a "not so random" city name - Frankfurt.


Indeed, random was the wrong word.  That word is often used incorrectly. 
 The correct word is "arbitrary".


It is frankly entirely arbitrary to suggest a particular city, in terms 
of the a directed discussion about the /approach/ of choosing cities.


It presumes that the existing processes haven't researched most choices 
for Europe, Asia, or North America.


d/

--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Andy Newton]

On Aug 8, 2012, at 3:40 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:

>Simon> Does nobody care about going to new places so that new people
>Simon> are exposed to the IETF and may start getting involved?
> 
>Simon> We've seen this positive effect many times when we went
>Simon> outside our comfort zone...
> 
> Simon, it *is* important.
> But, we don't have to go to a new place every meeting.
> 
> If 1/3 meetings are in North America, I see no reason why we can't
> return to places that work.  I think the same mostly applies to Europe
> as well.  (We don't have to go back to the *same* place every year,
> although there are advantages of that.  So a Paris/Prague would be fine,
> but please, not Paris in the summer... nor Orlando on spring break)
> 
> Let's innovate for that third meeting, realizing that we do not yet
> have a preferred place in Asia, or any place in Africa or South America,
> but maybe we should. 

I think this is a fine idea.

And while some see value in going to new places so as to expose new people to 
the IETF, there is one benefit to revisiting venues that has not been given. By 
revisiting well trodden venues, attendees have the opportunity to learn what 
works for them as far as hotel, travel, etc… and can learn to optimize based on 
their needs and hopefully that will enable them to reduce costs in both money, 
time, and mental energy.

-andy

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Arturo Servin]

+1

Regards,
as

On 8 Aug 2012, at 16:40, Michael Richardson wrote:

> Let's innovate for that third meeting, realizing that we do not yet
> have a preferred place in Asia, or any place in Africa or South America,
> but maybe we should. 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Geoff Mulligan]

So then why not consider, London, Paris (not the Concorde Lafayette), 
Frankfurt, Amsterdam?





On Aug 7, 2012, at 8:55 PM, Ole Jacobsen  wrote:

> 
> You said about Prague:
> 
> "...[do] folks who live outside of that region not care about the 
> additional hop of travel to get to it?"
> 
> This gets cited often, and I don't really understand why. There are 
> VERY few European cities that are reachable directly from the US (or 
> Asia for that matter). Most require transiting some kind of major hub 
> (London, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam to name a few). There will always 
> be exceptions, I am sure you can get to Stockholm directly from the US 
> East Coast, but not from the West Coast. I am sure a very large 
> percentage of the IETF attendees from the US went through London or 
> Frankfurt (or a small number of alternatives) to get to Stockholm on 
> the two occasions when we met there.
> 
> Since I travel to Norway on a more or less regular basis, I am used to 
> (and quite happy to) go through Frankfurt or London, it's just a fact 
> of life especially if you factor in the "preferred carrier" (personal 
> or corporate). Prague may be an "extra hop," but depending on 
> schedules you might well get to your destination (hotel) just as 
> quickly as you would for getting from CDG to central Paris or LHR to 
> central London.
> 
> If we restrict European cities to the ones with direct flight 
> connections from other continents, we're really limiting the choices. 
> Let's be a little more realistic and consider actual travel "pain" 
> from the top hubs in Europe, assuming we can't (always) meet in those 
> places.
> 
> I do understand that the extra hop does add some cost, which is why
> I always consider trains as a reasonable alternative, albeit not a
> particularly fast one. For example, the cost for a First Class train
> ticket from Frankfurt to Prague was 98 Euros. I am not suggesting
> that this is always going to be a reasonable alternative, and I am
> worried that the mere mention of "train" on this list may result in
> a flame war, but still...
> 
> Ole
> 
> 
> 
> Ole J. Jacobsen
> Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
> Cisco Systems
> Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
> E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
> Skype: organdemo
> 
> 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Geoff Mulligan]

So I'm confused...  We're we talking about the possibility of sticking to one 
European city, one north American city and one Asian city and not picking 
various cities throughout the world.

I was just suggesting picking -a- city in Europe that was not multiple hops 
from most US hubs.  Prague, while a nice city, isn't one hop and as Dave 
pointed out this adds costs and time, just as would choosing a US city that is 
multiple hops from major European hubs.

I loved Vancouver and would go back there over and over again.  I like 
Minneapolis for convenience and venue and would go there every time.

I liked Prague, both times, but had trouble getting there both times and it did 
add time and cost.

Geoff



On Aug 8, 2012, at 1:06 PM, Ole Jacobsen  wrote:

> 
> Geoff,
> 
> What are you talking about? Of course we are "considering" all of 
> those places. We are going to London in 2014 for example, we went to 
> Paris this year. But, like with all popular places, finding venues 
> available for OUR dates is not easy. Add to that the costs and you 
> will understand why we don't meet in London or Paris or Frankfurt or 
> Amsterdam more often.
> 
> Ole
> 
> 
> Ole J. Jacobsen
> Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
> Cisco Systems
> Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
> E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
> Skype: organdemo
> 
> 
> On Wed, 8 Aug 2012, Geoff Mulligan wrote:
> 
>> So then why not consider, London, Paris (not the Concorde 
>> Lafayette), Frankfurt, Amsterdam?
>> 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Geoff Mulligan]

Frankfurt?



On Aug 8, 2012, at 12:49 PM, Dave Crocker  wrote:

> 
> 
> On 8/8/2012 11:46 AM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:
>> So then why not consider, London, Paris (not the Concorde Lafayette), 
>> Frankfurt, Amsterdam?
> 
> 
> shockingly, amsterdam can't handle the ietf.  wrong mix of resources. really.
> 
> paris appears to have broad crime and work-ethic patterns that also are 
> problematic, not just at the concorde.
> 
> to be clear: i'm speaking for myself.
> 
> d/
> 
> -- 
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Michael Richardson]

> "Simon" == Simon Perreault  writes:
Simon> Le 2012-08-08 12:34, Geoff Mulligan a écrit :
>> I also would vote to return to Minneapolis again and again even
>> permanently.

Simon> Does nobody care about going to new places so that new people
Simon> are exposed to the IETF and may start getting involved?

Simon> We've seen this positive effect many times when we went
Simon> outside our comfort zone...

Simon, it *is* important.
But, we don't have to go to a new place every meeting.

If 1/3 meetings are in North America, I see no reason why we can't
return to places that work.  I think the same mostly applies to Europe
as well.  (We don't have to go back to the *same* place every year,
although there are advantages of that.  So a Paris/Prague would be fine,
but please, not Paris in the summer... nor Orlando on spring break)

Let's innovate for that third meeting, realizing that we do not yet
have a preferred place in Asia, or any place in Africa or South America,
but maybe we should. 

-- 
]   He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life!   |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON|net architect[
] m...@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
   Kyoto Plus: watch the video 
   then sign the petition. 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Dhruv Dhody]

Hi,

For new how is Dubai or Barcelona?

Repeat: I would like Prague, Vancouver, Quebec!

Regards,
D

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Arturo Servin  wrote:

>
> Besides where to to repeat, some new places to go that are cheaper
> and closer to me (and possible to others, and perhaps not so bad to many).
>
> Sao Paolo, Mexico City, Miami, Madrid, Cancun, Santiago, Panama,
> San Juan
>
> Regards,
> as
>
> On 9 Aug 2012, at 12:22, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
>
> >
> > Frankfurt has been considered. Turns out that it is one of the most
> > expensive cities in all of Europe to have a conference. It is also
> > geared mostly towards large tradeshows. The Frankfurt Messe is about
> > the size of your average Olympic Park, just walking from the nearest
> > hotel to your venue Hall could take 15 minutes.
> >
> > Ole
> >
> >
> > Ole J. Jacobsen
> > Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
> > Cisco Systems
> > Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
> > E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
> > Skype: organdemo
> >
>
>

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Arturo Servin]

Besides where to to repeat, some new places to go that are cheaper and 
closer to me (and possible to others, and perhaps not so bad to many).

Sao Paolo, Mexico City, Miami, Madrid, Cancun, Santiago, Panama, San 
Juan

Regards,
as

On 9 Aug 2012, at 12:22, Ole Jacobsen wrote:

> 
> Frankfurt has been considered. Turns out that it is one of the most
> expensive cities in all of Europe to have a conference. It is also
> geared mostly towards large tradeshows. The Frankfurt Messe is about
> the size of your average Olympic Park, just walking from the nearest 
> hotel to your venue Hall could take 15 minutes.
> 
> Ole
> 
> 
> Ole J. Jacobsen
> Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
> Cisco Systems
> Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
> E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
> Skype: organdemo
> 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Ole Jacobsen]

Frankfurt has been considered. Turns out that it is one of the most
expensive cities in all of Europe to have a conference. It is also
geared mostly towards large tradeshows. The Frankfurt Messe is about
the size of your average Olympic Park, just walking from the nearest 
hotel to your venue Hall could take 15 minutes.

Ole


Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
Skype: organdemo

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Ole Jacobsen]

On Wed, 8 Aug 2012, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

> So I'm confused...  We're we talking about the possibility of 
> sticking to one European city, one north American city and one Asian 
> city and not picking various cities throughout the world.

Oh, I see. My reading was that we would focus on small number of 
cities in each region, especially since we cannot depend on ONE
being always available for our dates, host and sponsorship 
notwithstanding.

Ole 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Yoav Nir]

On Aug 9, 2012, at 6:07 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:

> offlist.

Not so much

> Geoff,
> 
> Frankfurt is a city in Germany.  I believe the IETF has never been there.

Two more tidbits:
 - It's a huge aviation hub. There are direct flights from everywhere, similar 
to CDG, Heathrow, or Schiphol
 - Unlike Paris, London and Amsterdam, it's not a great tourist attraction, so 
conceivably it would be cheaper.

> Other than those two tidbits about it, I've no idea what is to be 
> accomplished by someone's randomly throwing out the names of cities for 
> a discussion like this, especially when threads like these always have a 
> great deal of trouble staying focused on the /principle/ rather than 
> haggling the details.

The principle would be to go to aviation hubs so as to minimize the collective 
pain. Most people from the US going to Prague, would have a connection in 
Frankfurt, so a meeting in Frankfurt would reduce the amount of flights.

Yoav

> On 8/8/2012 12:24 PM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:
>> Frankfurt?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 8, 2012, at 12:49 PM, Dave Crocker  wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 8/8/2012 11:46 AM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:
 So then why not consider, London, Paris (not the Concorde Lafayette), 
 Frankfurt, Amsterdam?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> shockingly, amsterdam can't handle the ietf.  wrong mix of resources. 
>>> really.
>>> 
>>> paris appears to have broad crime and work-ethic patterns that also are 
>>> problematic, not just at the concorde.
>>> 
>>> to be clear: i'm speaking for myself.
>>> 
>>> d/
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Dave Crocker
>>> Brandenburg InternetWorking
>>> bbiw.net
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net
> 
> Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Dave Crocker]

On 8/9/2012 8:07 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:

offlist.



weird.  i really did prune the list.  sorry.

but then, it's not as if my concern applies only to Geoff's note...

d/

--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Dave Crocker]

On 8/8/2012 1:52 PM, John Levine wrote:

ps. btw, what is it that you think is different about this from the way
we /do/ discuss protocol specs?


People discussing venues are less willing to believe that anyone
else's experience or issues differ from their own.



A common problem in /any/ IETF discussion, technical or otherwise, is 
the tendency of speakers to live within two views:


1.  If it is good enough for me, it must be good enough for everyone

2.  If it is unacceptable to me, it must be unacceptable for everyone.

We are not a very empathetic crowd.

I can't say that I see the 'less' that you assert.

d/


--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Dave Crocker]

offlist.


Geoff,

Frankfurt is a city in Germany.  I believe the IETF has never been there.

Other than those two tidbits about it, I've no idea what is to be 
accomplished by someone's randomly throwing out the names of cities for 
a discussion like this, especially when threads like these always have a 
great deal of trouble staying focused on the /principle/ rather than 
haggling the details.


d/

On 8/8/2012 12:24 PM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

Frankfurt?



On Aug 8, 2012, at 12:49 PM, Dave Crocker  wrote:




On 8/8/2012 11:46 AM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

So then why not consider, London, Paris (not the Concorde Lafayette), 
Frankfurt, Amsterdam?



shockingly, amsterdam can't handle the ietf.  wrong mix of resources. really.

paris appears to have broad crime and work-ethic patterns that also are 
problematic, not just at the concorde.

to be clear: i'm speaking for myself.

d/

--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net





--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[t . p .]

 Original Message -
From: "Geoff Mulligan" 
To: "Richard Shockey" 
Cc: 
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 5:34 PM

I also would vote to return to Minneapolis again and again even
permanently.


So, would I despite London 2014 being only a train ride away.
Minneapolis has the flights, and flights across the Atlantic are so much
cheaper than those across Europe,  has the range of hotels (and has the
possibility of extra-mural interests, although it is travel and hotel
costs that dominate my decision-making)


Tom Petch


Geoff




On Aug 6, 2012, at 2:32 PM, "Richard Shockey" 
wrote:

>
>
> [RS> ] +1 and no employer ever argued that going to Minneapolis was a
boondoggle.  The Hilton in Minneapolis  of all the IETF meetings I’ve
attended has the most optimal layout of meeting rooms etc.
>
>
> If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the
best choice IMHO.  It's very reasonably priced, easy for many to get to
and the hotel has adequate space for us (even back when we had many more
attendees).  Personally, the weather is not critical to me, since I
spend the vast majority of my time in the hotel meeting rooms, so I'm
very happy if we meet there in March and November.
>
> Mary
>
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
 wrote:
> I've never been to an IETF meeting where the plane fare has exceeded
the hotel cost for a week. Caveats to that are that I have mostly gone
for IETF recommended hotels, so may have missed particularly cheap
hotels, and that I have only been to North American and Europe (but that
statistic includes Vancouver and the even further away western US cities
down to San Diego). And of course I fly economy, and it's much cheaper
including a Saturday night in your trip, even at the cost of an extra
night in a hotel (at least it is from here). An almost exception was
Paris this year where I was staying fairly cheaply, but that was a
cost-shared trip between me and my employer, and I didn't fly (I went by
train - though that's not cheaper, just better). Paris has cheap(er)
hotels and a metro I understand, so I felt less location constrained.
>
> --
> Christopher Dearlove
> Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
> Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
> BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
> West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
> Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
> chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com
>
> BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
> Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace
Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
> Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)
[mailto:nurit.sprec...@nsn.com]
> Sent: 06 August 2012 15:07
> To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan;
ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
>
> --! WARNING ! --
> This message originates from outside our organisation,
> either from an external partner or from the internet.
> Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
> Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters
> for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.
> 
>
> When you are not close (time), flight cost may become higher in the
priority (over hotem)
> Flying to Vancouver for me for example is the most expensive
tripeven though the city is amazing and the host was wonderful!
>
> -Original Message-
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of ext Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 4:56 PM
> To: Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
>
> Dublin's problem was that the venue was isolated from the city. This
has also been the case with e.g. San Diego. (I'm assuming no personal
car.) Contrast with Minneapolis (and several other places) where you
were right in the city. Being in a city is better for lunch and dinner
options, taking a break to go to a bookshop (or to buy something you
forgot to bring) and so on. (I'm deliberately not including tourism
here.)
>
> However at the moment my priorities to make being able to attend
possible would be time (so the closer to me the better - I realise
that's impossible globally), cost (hotel first, flight second, rest is
noise) and the ability to plan ahead to only attend part of the week.
This is the current economic reality. Dublin actually scores quite well
on those for me.
>
> --
> Christopher Dearlove
> Senio

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Ole Jacobsen]

No more so than Orlando where we are going after Atlanta, in my 
opinion. There exists a whole set of requirements ranging from
travel considerations, costs, suitable venue, hotels, and nearby 
environment to host and sponsorship availability. I see no reason
why Miami would be automatically excluded from consideration.

Ole


Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
Skype: organdemo


On Wed, 8 Aug 2012, Hector Santos wrote:

> Simon Perreault wrote:
> > Le 2012-08-08 12:34, Geoff Mulligan a écrit :
> > > I also would vote to return to Minneapolis again and again even
> > > permanently.
> > 
> > Does nobody care about going to new places so that new people are exposed to
> > the IETF and may start getting involved?
> > 
> > We've seen this positive effect many times when we went outside our comfort
> > zone...
> 
> Is Miami out of the question?
> 
> -- 
> HLS
> 
> 
> 

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Hector Santos]

Simon Perreault wrote:

Le 2012-08-08 12:34, Geoff Mulligan a écrit :
I also would vote to return to Minneapolis again and again even 
permanently.


Does nobody care about going to new places so that new people are 
exposed to the IETF and may start getting involved?


We've seen this positive effect many times when we went outside our 
comfort zone...


Is Miami out of the question?

--
HLS

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Glen Zorn]

On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 12:18 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

> On 8/8/12 12:06 PM, Yoav Nir wrote:
> > Mileage varies. 
> > 
> > For me it was the shortest and cheapest flight of any IETF meeting I have 
> > attended.
> 
> If we discussed protocols the way we discuss venue sites, all would be
> lost. "Oh, this feature works great for me, therefore let's include it
> in the spec."
> 
> Perhaps we might consider ending these interminable venue discussions
> and just complain three times a year when we visit a place that the IAOC
> has selected?


I though we already did that ;-).  

> 
> Peter
> 


<>

RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Glen Zorn]

On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 20:13 +0200, Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod
HaSharon) wrote:


> +1


Indeed, almost any place in Europe is easier & cheaper for me (not to
mention less hassle from immigration and customs!) than any place in the
US.


> 
> -Original Message-
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext 
> Yoav Nir
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 9:07 PM
> To: Geoff Mulligan
> Cc: Carsten Bormann; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
> 
> Mileage varies. 
> 
> For me it was the shortest and cheapest flight of any IETF meeting I have 
> attended.
> 
> Yoav
> 
> On Aug 8, 2012, at 7:41 PM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:
> 
> > I liked the hotel and prague was wonderful, but it didn't seem easy to get 
> > to cheaply from the US.
> > 
> > Geoff
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:22 PM, Carsten Bormann  wrote:
> > 
> >> On Aug 6, 2012, at 16:41, Mary Barnes  wrote:
> >> 
> >>> If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the 
> >>> best choice IMHO.  
> >> 
> >> +1 a lot.
> >> (If we indeed have to choose the US.)
> >> Great facility to get work done, good food, reasonable flights.
> >> 
> >> And add Prague as the staple for Europe.
> >> 
> >> Grüße, Carsten
> 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Glen Zorn]

On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 10:34 -0600, Geoff Mulligan wrote:
> I also would vote to return to Minneapolis again and again even
> permanently.
> 
> 
> Geoff
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Aug 6, 2012, at 2:32 PM, "Richard Shockey" 
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > [RS> ] +1 and no employer ever argued that going to Minneapolis was
> > a boondoggle.  


I imagine that few employers would ever argue that a trip to Hell would
be a boondoggle, either,
but that doesn't make it a good idea...


> > The Hilton in Minneapolis  of all the IETF meetings I’ve attended
> > has the most optimal layout of meeting rooms etc. 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is
> > the best choice IMHO.  It's very reasonably priced, easy for many to
> > get to and the hotel has adequate space for us (even back when we
> > had many more attendees).  Personally, the weather is not critical
> > to me, since I spend the vast majority of my time in the hotel
> > meeting rooms, so I'm very happy if we meet there in March and
> > November.   
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > Mary
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > I've never been to an IETF meeting where the plane fare has exceeded
> > the hotel cost for a week. Caveats to that are that I have mostly
> > gone for IETF recommended hotels, so may have missed particularly
> > cheap hotels, and that I have only been to North American and Europe
> > (but that statistic includes Vancouver and the even further away
> > western US cities down to San Diego). And of course I fly economy,
> > and it's much cheaper including a Saturday night in your trip, even
> > at the cost of an extra night in a hotel (at least it is from here).
> > An almost exception was Paris this year where I was staying fairly
> > cheaply, but that was a cost-shared trip between me and my employer,
> > and I didn't fly (I went by train - though that's not cheaper, just
> > better). Paris has cheap(er) hotels and a metro I understand, so I
> > felt less location constrained.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Christopher Dearlove
> > Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
> > Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
> > BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
> > West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
> > Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
> > chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com
> > 
> > BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
> > Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace
> > Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
> > Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > 
> > 
> > From: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)
> > [mailto:nurit.sprec...@nsn.com]
> > Sent: 06 August 2012 15:07
> > To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan;
> > ietf@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
> > 
> > 
> > --! WARNING ! --
> > This message originates from outside our organisation,
> > either from an external partner or from the internet.
> > Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
> > Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters
> > for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.
> > 
> > 
> > When you are not close (time), flight cost may become higher in the
> > priority (over hotem)
> > Flying to Vancouver for me for example is the most expensive
> > tripeven though the city is amazing and the host was wonderful!
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
> > Of ext Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
> > Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 4:56 PM
> > To: Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
> > 
> > Dublin's problem was that the venue was isolated from the city. This
> > has also been the case with e.g. San Diego. (I'm assuming no
> > personal car.) Contrast with Minneapolis (and several other places)
> > where you were right in th

Re: So, where to repeat?

[John Levine]

>ps. btw, what is it that you think is different about this from the way 
>we /do/ discuss protocol specs?

People discussing venues are less willing to believe that anyone
else's experience or issues differ from their own.

R's,
John

Re: So, where to repeat?

[SM]

Hi Peter,
At 11:18 08-08-2012, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

If we discussed protocols the way we discuss venue sites, all would be
lost. "Oh, this feature works great for me, therefore let's include it
in the spec."


That's how protocols are discussed. :-)


Perhaps we might consider ending these interminable venue discussions
and just complain three times a year when we visit a place that the IAOC
has selected?


Here's a quick snapshot.

 Quebec has been in the exact same location for over 400 years.  The city
 has historic monuments which are insulting to the Americans who failed
 to capture the city in 1775. [1]

 Brand-new conference centre, canonical hotel is a Hilton, and
 boy can I show you some bars... [2]

 Nothing is "a reasonable walk" when the average temperature is 32 C.
 At least not for the "average" IETF attendee. [3]

 You'd be eligible to vote if you'd attended an IETF anytime within the past,
 say, 2 years - or if you were willing to commit to attending the one you vote
 on if it wins. [4]

 There are a host of reasons that voting is a stupid decision making 
process. I

 thought we knew that. [5]

 Now, we should maybe calibrate that in something other than USD (maybe in
 milligrams of gold, or the Economist's Bic Mac index) and also find an
 independent source on hotel price inflation. [6]

 According to the stats, since IETF-1, there have been 6 IETF meetings in
 Minneapolis.  Every one of them had significantly lower number of 
participants
 than the meeting before  and after them... except IETF-44 which was 
lower than

 IETF-43 but about the same as IETF-45, but IETF-45 was in Oslo, Norway, and
 IETF-46 went back up to higher levels again. [7]

 Maastricht Bans Cannabis Coffee-Shop Tourists [8]

 The social was held at an abbey that had wonderful dark beer in 1 
litre steins.
 I discovered that it's best to drink only one, if flying home at 
30,000 feet the

 next day. [9]

 Obviously, not enough Canadians from outside Toronto were asked.
 Everyone in the country loves to hate Toronto. [10]

Regards,
-sm

1. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg66962.html
2. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg68326.html
3. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg68330.html
4. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg68655.html
5. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg68681.html
6. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg68682.html
7. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg68729.html
8. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg69714.html
9. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg70647.html
10. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg70653.html 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Ole Jacobsen]

Geoff,

What are you talking about? Of course we are "considering" all of 
those places. We are going to London in 2014 for example, we went to 
Paris this year. But, like with all popular places, finding venues 
available for OUR dates is not easy. Add to that the costs and you 
will understand why we don't meet in London or Paris or Frankfurt or 
Amsterdam more often.

Ole


Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
Skype: organdemo


On Wed, 8 Aug 2012, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

> So then why not consider, London, Paris (not the Concorde 
> Lafayette), Frankfurt, Amsterdam?
> 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Dave Crocker]

On 8/8/2012 11:46 AM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

So then why not consider, London, Paris (not the Concorde Lafayette), 
Frankfurt, Amsterdam?



shockingly, amsterdam can't handle the ietf.  wrong mix of resources. 
really.


paris appears to have broad crime and work-ethic patterns that also are 
problematic, not just at the concorde.


to be clear: i'm speaking for myself.

d/

--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Dave Crocker]

On 8/8/2012 11:18 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

Perhaps we might consider ending these interminable venue discussions
and just complain three times a year when we visit a place that the IAOC
has selected?



now i'm completely confused.

i thought that that was/is exactly what's being done...

d/

ps. btw, what is it that you think is different about this from the way 
we /do/ discuss protocol specs?


--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Peter Saint-Andre]

On 8/8/12 12:06 PM, Yoav Nir wrote:
> Mileage varies. 
> 
> For me it was the shortest and cheapest flight of any IETF meeting I have 
> attended.

If we discussed protocols the way we discuss venue sites, all would be
lost. "Oh, this feature works great for me, therefore let's include it
in the spec."

Perhaps we might consider ending these interminable venue discussions
and just complain three times a year when we visit a place that the IAOC
has selected?

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)]

+1

-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext 
Yoav Nir
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 9:07 PM
To: Geoff Mulligan
Cc: Carsten Bormann; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

Mileage varies. 

For me it was the shortest and cheapest flight of any IETF meeting I have 
attended.

Yoav

On Aug 8, 2012, at 7:41 PM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

> I liked the hotel and prague was wonderful, but it didn't seem easy to get to 
> cheaply from the US.
> 
> Geoff
> 
> 
> 
> On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:22 PM, Carsten Bormann  wrote:
> 
>> On Aug 6, 2012, at 16:41, Mary Barnes  wrote:
>> 
>>> If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the best 
>>> choice IMHO.  
>> 
>> +1 a lot.
>> (If we indeed have to choose the US.)
>> Great facility to get work done, good food, reasonable flights.
>> 
>> And add Prague as the staple for Europe.
>> 
>> Grüße, Carsten

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Yoav Nir]

Mileage varies. 

For me it was the shortest and cheapest flight of any IETF meeting I have 
attended.

Yoav

On Aug 8, 2012, at 7:41 PM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

> I liked the hotel and prague was wonderful, but it didn't seem easy to get to 
> cheaply from the US.
> 
> Geoff
> 
> 
> 
> On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:22 PM, Carsten Bormann  wrote:
> 
>> On Aug 6, 2012, at 16:41, Mary Barnes  wrote:
>> 
>>> If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the best 
>>> choice IMHO.  
>> 
>> +1 a lot.
>> (If we indeed have to choose the US.)
>> Great facility to get work done, good food, reasonable flights.
>> 
>> And add Prague as the staple for Europe.
>> 
>> Grüße, Carsten

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Simon Perreault]

Le 2012-08-08 12:34, Geoff Mulligan a écrit :

I also would vote to return to Minneapolis again and again even permanently.


Does nobody care about going to new places so that new people are 
exposed to the IETF and may start getting involved?


We've seen this positive effect many times when we went outside our 
comfort zone...


Simon
--
DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
NAT64/DNS64 open-source--> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server   --> http://numb.viagenie.ca

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Geoff Mulligan]

I liked the hotel and prague was wonderful, but it didn't seem easy to get to 
cheaply from the US.

Geoff



On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:22 PM, Carsten Bormann  wrote:

> On Aug 6, 2012, at 16:41, Mary Barnes  wrote:
> 
>> If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the best 
>> choice IMHO.  
> 
> +1 a lot.
> (If we indeed have to choose the US.)
> Great facility to get work done, good food, reasonable flights.
> 
> And add Prague as the staple for Europe.
> 
> Grüße, Carsten
> 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Geoff Mulligan]

The Orlando airport is a nightmare almost any time and will be even worse 
during this upcoming IETF.  When I had my FlyClear card it was the only airport 
where I ever felt that it was necessary.

Avoiding Orlando during the many weeks a spring break would have been good.

Geoff




On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:14 PM, Michael Richardson  wrote:

> 
>> I've never been to an IETF meeting where the plane fare has exceeded the
>> hotel cost for a week. 
> 
> note: I pay my own way, and make all my own arrangements.
> 
> The only meetings where my hotel costs exceeded my transporation costs
> were the Montreal IETFs (I live in Ottawa).  When I've flown I have
> seldom ever been on direct flights.
> 
> I *do* avoid the main hotel if the price is poor.  I did get the
> Sheraton Wall (backup hotel IETF84), via hotwire.com, which surprised me.
> 
> I find staying over saturday night no longer has any affect on my travel
> costs. 
> 
> I do prefer returning to the same places, and I do like Minneapolis.
> (Yes, even in March and November)
> 
> I am more concerned that we have three north-american IETFs in a row
> (Vancouver, Atlanta, Orlando), and 4 of the next 6 are in North America.
> (Not counting Hawaii as North America for the purposes of travel
> budgets, or it's be 5/7)
> 
> I'm also concerned about going popular places (Quebec, Orlando) during
> peak tourist season. 
> 
> -- 
> Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works 
> 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Geoff Mulligan]

I also would vote to return to Minneapolis again and again even permanently.

Geoff




On Aug 6, 2012, at 2:32 PM, "Richard Shockey"  wrote:

>  
>  
> [RS> ] +1 and no employer ever argued that going to Minneapolis was a 
> boondoggle.  The Hilton in Minneapolis  of all the IETF meetings I’ve 
> attended has the most optimal layout of meeting rooms etc. 
>  
>  
> If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the best 
> choice IMHO.  It's very reasonably priced, easy for many to get to and the 
> hotel has adequate space for us (even back when we had many more attendees).  
> Personally, the weather is not critical to me, since I spend the vast 
> majority of my time in the hotel meeting rooms, so I'm very happy if we meet 
> there in March and November.   
>  
> Mary
>  
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) 
>  wrote:
> I've never been to an IETF meeting where the plane fare has exceeded the 
> hotel cost for a week. Caveats to that are that I have mostly gone for IETF 
> recommended hotels, so may have missed particularly cheap hotels, and that I 
> have only been to North American and Europe (but that statistic includes 
> Vancouver and the even further away western US cities down to San Diego). And 
> of course I fly economy, and it's much cheaper including a Saturday night in 
> your trip, even at the cost of an extra night in a hotel (at least it is from 
> here). An almost exception was Paris this year where I was staying fairly 
> cheaply, but that was a cost-shared trip between me and my employer, and I 
> didn't fly (I went by train - though that's not cheaper, just better). Paris 
> has cheap(er) hotels and a metro I understand, so I felt less location 
> constrained.
> 
> --
> Christopher Dearlove
> Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
> Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
> BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
> West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
> Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
> chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com
> 
> BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
> Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, 
> Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
> Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon) [mailto:nurit.sprec...@nsn.com]
> Sent: 06 August 2012 15:07
> To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan; 
> ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
> 
> --! WARNING ! --
> This message originates from outside our organisation,
> either from an external partner or from the internet.
> Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
> Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters
> for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.
> 
> 
> When you are not close (time), flight cost may become higher in the priority 
> (over hotem)
> Flying to Vancouver for me for example is the most expensive tripeven 
> though the city is amazing and the host was wonderful!
> 
> -----Original Message-
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext 
> Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 4:56 PM
> To: Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
> 
> Dublin's problem was that the venue was isolated from the city. This has also 
> been the case with e.g. San Diego. (I'm assuming no personal car.) Contrast 
> with Minneapolis (and several other places) where you were right in the city. 
> Being in a city is better for lunch and dinner options, taking a break to go 
> to a bookshop (or to buy something you forgot to bring) and so on. (I'm 
> deliberately not including tourism here.)
> 
> However at the moment my priorities to make being able to attend possible 
> would be time (so the closer to me the better - I realise that's impossible 
> globally), cost (hotel first, flight second, rest is noise) and the ability 
> to plan ahead to only attend part of the week. This is the current economic 
> reality. Dublin actually scores quite well on those for me.
> 
> --
> Christopher Dearlove
> Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
> Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
> BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
> West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
> Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fa

RE: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)]

> I'll bet Dublin would be rated higher if the meetings had been
downtown.  

Indeed.

Mehmet 

> -Original Message-
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of ext Steve
> Crocker
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 12:01 AM
> To: Tim Chown
> Cc: ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)
> 
> I'll bet Dublin would be rated higher if the meetings had been
downtown.  Same for
> Vienna.
> 
> Steve
> 
> On Aug 7, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Tim Chown wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > My top three repeat venues would be Prague, Minneapolis and
Vancouver.  Great
> meeting venues, with everything you need nearby.
> >
> > My least favoured venues have been Dublin, Vienna and Maastricht.
> >
> > Of course, you have to experiment to find good repeat venues...
> >
> > Tim

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[John Levine]

>If we restrict European cities to the ones with direct flight 
>connections from other continents, we're really limiting the choices. 

For some of us, if we limit our choices to places with direct flights,
that means Newark, Philadelphia, or Detroit.  Count your blessings.

We can argue about whether Quebec was unduly hard to get to (I didn't
have any problem when I got tickets a month ahead, even though I was
redeeming points), but it seems to me that so long as most people can
get to or from the venue in less than a day for a reasonable amount of
money, it's OK.

R's,
John

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[John Levine]

>> The Burlington hotel claims that they can host a 1500 person meeting.
>
>
>Yeah, it's exactly that easy to choose a venue.  A single number does it.[1]
>
>not.

Of course.  MAAWG has been there so we know it's not a dump, it's
downtown, they can deal with nerds with lots of computers who demand
coffee and cookies, the prices are not totally absurd, etc.  MAAWG is
smaller than the IETF so there may well be problems that make it
unsuitable, but if people are looking for a downtown Dublin hotel,
that's the most likely one.

R's,
John

PS: Weren't you at that meeting?  The day we arrived there was a
benefit women's road race in the morning so when we got there in the
afternoon, the pubs were all full of the racers, who ranged from
athletic teens to good natured grannies, and their friends.

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Ole Jacobsen]

On Tue, 7 Aug 2012, Dave Crocker wrote:

> > Most require transiting some kind of major hub (London, Paris, 
> > Frankfurt, Amsterdam to name a few).
> 
> So, those hubs are reachable directly from the US and Asia, aren't they?

Yes, they are, and we have met in Paris twice and London once, will 
meet there again in 2014. Amsterdam, well, we've met there once too,
but that was a long time ago and the group was MUCH smaller. London
and Paris also happen to be among the most expensive places in the
world, and also very "popular" in terms of locating a suitable and
available venue.

> > I do understand that the extra hop does add some cost,
> 
> Something like an extra US$200 or so, if I remember my research of a couple of
> years ago.  And a round-trip extra cost in time of 1/2-1 day...

See my previous message. Short answer: it depends. Frankfurt to Prague 
is a really short flight.

Tradeoffs include significantly lower venue and hotel costs, more
availability of said venue etc. I think you'd generally get your
$200 back, but this is certainly not something one can ever be
particularly scientific about given all the variables. And with
specific reference to Prague, well, it certainly fits the "we know
this venue, we like this venue" mantra, hence it gets the "should
repeat" checkmark.

> 
> 
> d/
> -- 
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net
> 
> 

Ole

Ole J. Jacobsen 
Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
Skype: organdemo

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Dave Crocker]

On 8/7/2012 7:55 PM, Ole Jacobsen wrote:


You said about Prague:

"...[do] folks who live outside of that region not care about the
additional hop of travel to get to it?"

This gets cited often, and I don't really understand why. There are
VERY few European cities that are reachable directly from the US (or
Asia for that matter). Most require transiting some kind of major hub
(London, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam to name a few).


So, those hubs are reachable directly from the US and Asia, aren't they?



If we restrict European cities to the ones with direct flight
connections from other continents, we're really limiting the choices.


Yup.



I do understand that the extra hop does add some cost,


Something like an extra US$200 or so, if I remember my research of a 
couple of years ago.  And a round-trip extra cost in time of 1/2-1 day...



d/
--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Ole Jacobsen]

You said about Prague:

"...[do] folks who live outside of that region not care about the 
additional hop of travel to get to it?"

This gets cited often, and I don't really understand why. There are 
VERY few European cities that are reachable directly from the US (or 
Asia for that matter). Most require transiting some kind of major hub 
(London, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam to name a few). There will always 
be exceptions, I am sure you can get to Stockholm directly from the US 
East Coast, but not from the West Coast. I am sure a very large 
percentage of the IETF attendees from the US went through London or 
Frankfurt (or a small number of alternatives) to get to Stockholm on 
the two occasions when we met there.

Since I travel to Norway on a more or less regular basis, I am used to 
(and quite happy to) go through Frankfurt or London, it's just a fact 
of life especially if you factor in the "preferred carrier" (personal 
or corporate). Prague may be an "extra hop," but depending on 
schedules you might well get to your destination (hotel) just as 
quickly as you would for getting from CDG to central Paris or LHR to 
central London.

If we restrict European cities to the ones with direct flight 
connections from other continents, we're really limiting the choices. 
Let's be a little more realistic and consider actual travel "pain" 
from the top hubs in Europe, assuming we can't (always) meet in those 
places.

I do understand that the extra hop does add some cost, which is why
I always consider trains as a reasonable alternative, albeit not a
particularly fast one. For example, the cost for a First Class train
ticket from Frankfurt to Prague was 98 Euros. I am not suggesting
that this is always going to be a reasonable alternative, and I am
worried that the mere mention of "train" on this list may result in
a flame war, but still...

Ole



Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
Skype: organdemo

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Melinda Shore]

On 8/7/12 6:24 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:

I haven't seen anyone post negative comments about Prague in this
thread.  By way of probing, I'll ask for them.  For example, do folks
who live outside of that region not care about the additional hop of
travel to get to it?


It was over 24 hours of travel to get to Prague and over 24
hours of travel to get to Taipei - it's a wash.

It's looking like given the constraints we can't meet in Alaska.
Kidding - there aren't any facilities large enough, even in
Anchorage.

Melinda

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Dave Crocker]

On 8/7/2012 4:34 PM, Richard Shockey wrote:

+1  Prague was excellent .. I actually liked Quebec City but connections
were awful.


I haven't seen anyone post negative comments about Prague in this 
thread.  By way of probing, I'll ask for them.  For example, do folks 
who live outside of that region not care about the additional hop of 
travel to get to it?




So where in Asia?  You have to have the 3.


Asia is east of Prague.

sigh.  sorry.

As Bob has noted from the IAOC presentation, Asia is actually proving a 
challenge.  Due to language and culture challenges, we seem to really 
need a host.  And there there are price problems we keep hitting.




Is this discussion is really about are we the Internet Entertainment and
Travel Facility??   Some of us have employers some of us do not.  Is this
about "diversity" or getting the work done.


While it's not automatic that these are mutually exclusive, I sometimes 
find it confusing to discern the criteria that participants apply.


d/

--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Dave Crocker]

On 8/7/2012 5:29 PM, John Levine wrote:

So I agree with that. If a feasible venue actually in Dublin
turns up I'll be sure to let Ray/IAOC/site-visit folks know.


The Burlington hotel claims that they can host a 1500 person meeting.



Yeah, it's exactly that easy to choose a venue.  A single number does it.[1]

not.

Folks, the IETF actually has a rather constraining set of requirements 
and the secretariat has to put in quite a bit of effort to qualify 
venues.  Many places that are otherwise just dandy can't deal with these 
complexities.  For example, we run quite a few parallel meetings that 
are large.


Take a careful look at the range of serious complaints that get lodged 
about venues and you can start to glean the requirements list.  (I said 
serious.  That is, complaints that get significant traction from the 
community.)


Perhaps the Burlington really can accommodate us, but given the rate at 
which places get rejected, the expectation ain't great.  That doesn't 
mean reject it out of hand, of course.



d/


[1] For the places that we do go to and that we like, I've no idea what 
single capacity number they typically cite, but I predict it's more like 
double our actual size, if not triple.


--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[John Levine]

>So I agree with that. If a feasible venue actually in Dublin
>turns up I'll be sure to let Ray/IAOC/site-visit folks know.

The Burlington hotel claims that they can host a 1500 person meeting.

MAAWG met there in 2007 and it worked well for us, although that was
a somewhat smaller meeting.

R's,
John

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Stephen Farrell]

On 08/08/2012 12:30 AM, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2012, Tim Chown wrote:
> 
>> On 7 Aug 2012, at 23:01, Steve Crocker  wrote:
>>
>>> I'll bet Dublin would be rated higher if the meetings had been 
>>> downtown.  Same for Vienna.
>>
>> Quite possibly, but a rating is based on a venue, not a city.  
>> Dublin is a great city.  An out of town golf resort is not a great 
>> venue.
>>
>> Tim
> 
> Right, and I don't think we will be going back to CityWest ever:

So I agree with that. If a feasible venue actually in Dublin
turns up I'll be sure to let Ray/IAOC/site-visit folks know.

> http://www.herald.ie/news/creditors-fury-at-citywest-showdown-2489018.html

However the place is still open. Wonders of business I guess;-)

S.




> 
> Ole
>  
> 
> 

RE: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Richard Shockey]

+1  Prague was excellent .. I actually liked Quebec City but connections
were awful.  

So where in Asia?  You have to have the 3.  

Is this discussion is really about are we the Internet Entertainment and
Travel Facility??   Some of us have employers some of us do not.  Is this
about "diversity" or getting the work done. 

-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Steve Crocker
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 6:01 PM
To: Tim Chown
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

I'll bet Dublin would be rated higher if the meetings had been downtown.
Same for Vienna.

Steve
 
On Aug 7, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Tim Chown wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> My top three repeat venues would be Prague, Minneapolis and Vancouver.
Great meeting venues, with everything you need nearby.
> 
> My least favoured venues have been Dublin, Vienna and Maastricht.
> 
> Of course, you have to experiment to find good repeat venues...
> 
> Tim

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Ole Jacobsen]

On Tue, 7 Aug 2012, Tim Chown wrote:

> On 7 Aug 2012, at 23:01, Steve Crocker  wrote:
> 
> > I'll bet Dublin would be rated higher if the meetings had been 
> > downtown.  Same for Vienna.
> 
> Quite possibly, but a rating is based on a venue, not a city.  
> Dublin is a great city.  An out of town golf resort is not a great 
> venue.
> 
> Tim

Right, and I don't think we will be going back to CityWest ever:

http://www.herald.ie/news/creditors-fury-at-citywest-showdown-2489018.html

Ole
 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Tim Chown]

On 7 Aug 2012, at 23:01, Steve Crocker  wrote:

> I'll bet Dublin would be rated higher if the meetings had been downtown.  
> Same for Vienna.

Quite possibly, but a rating is based on a venue, not a city.  Dublin is a 
great city.  An out of town golf resort is not a great venue.

Tim

> On Aug 7, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Tim Chown wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> My top three repeat venues would be Prague, Minneapolis and Vancouver.  
>> Great meeting venues, with everything you need nearby.
>> 
>> My least favoured venues have been Dublin, Vienna and Maastricht.
>> 
>> Of course, you have to experiment to find good repeat venues...
>> 
>> Tim
> 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Steve Crocker]

I'll bet Dublin would be rated higher if the meetings had been downtown.  Same 
for Vienna.

Steve
 
On Aug 7, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Tim Chown wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> My top three repeat venues would be Prague, Minneapolis and Vancouver.  Great 
> meeting venues, with everything you need nearby.
> 
> My least favoured venues have been Dublin, Vienna and Maastricht.
> 
> Of course, you have to experiment to find good repeat venues...
> 
> Tim

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Tim Chown]

Hi,

My top three repeat venues would be Prague, Minneapolis and Vancouver.  Great 
meeting venues, with everything you need nearby.

My least favoured venues have been Dublin, Vienna and Maastricht.

Of course, you have to experiment to find good repeat venues...

Tim

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Dave Crocker]

BTW, if anyone finds the venue question extremely compelling / interesting
-- consider seeking a spot on the IAOC during the next nominating period.



Yes, please do.  Frankly, I'd prefer there be competition; it creates 
healthy debate within nomcom and might even improve community awareness 
of IAOC functions.


The one caveat that I'll offer is that the IAOC has a range of topics 
beyond meeting venue -- budget, tools development, IT ops, legal, IPR, etc.:


   http://iaoc.ietf.org/

They all need to be covered by all the IAOC members.

d/
--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Livingood, Jason]

BTW, if anyone finds the venue question extremely compelling / interesting
-- consider seeking a spot on the IAOC during the next nominating period.

- Jason

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Anshuman Pratap Chaudhary]

Why not in bermuda triangle- innovation coupled with adventure!!! 


Warm Regards, 

Anshuman 


Sent from my BlackBerry® Smartphone, regret typo's!


-Original Message-
From: "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)" 
Sender: ietf-boun...@ietf.org
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 17:28:33 
To: ext Andrew Sullivan; 
Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

Why the survey should limit it to the last five meetings...
In the long history we experienced additional good places
So maybe the survey should be more open and let each list his 3-5 favorable 
places based on the experience from earlier meetings?
Best regards,
Nurit

-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext 
Andrew Sullivan
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 6:11 PM
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

Dear colleagues,

On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 10:42:10AM -0400, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote:

> I expect that a chunk of the variance hinges on the qualifier

While the vagaries of air transport costs fascinate me, I'm not sure
how the question of the cost of one route at one time for one person
is broadly relevant.  The basic fact of having meetings in multiple
places (which is a direct consequence of trying to spread the pain of
travel) is that sometimes each of us will have an expensive flight.
(This is the same reason that I think confusing the
scheduling-in-advance question with the venue question is a bad idea.)

Dave Crocker's original point was that some venues are "good enough"
that you can tune them to be better.  I was sceptical, but upthread we
had two proposals: Minneapolis and Prague.  Nobody seems to have
argued against.

Any others?  At the plenary in Vancouver we heard "go here again", and
we've already decided to run that trial in any case.  That makes
three.  Also, many people expressed satisfaction in Québec.

Vancouver's Pacific location notwithstanding, this appears to me to
suggest that we have one "repeat" location in Europe and two in North
America.  This leaves us rather thin in Asia-Pacific.  I recall people
saying good things about Taipei.  

The point of all this, in case it isn't clear, is to ask to add a
question to the post-meeting survey about specific venues and whether
future meetings should try to return to them.  Given Arrow paradoxes
and so on, I think a short list with "yes/no" for each is much more
likely to yield useful aggregate results than a big list or a rank
order.  So, I'd like to suggest the following survey item be added to
the post-Vancouver survey:

Do you support the IETF returning to the very same venue (hotel
and meeting facilities) as the last time in the following
meetings:

- IETF 84, Vancouver (Hyatt) [Y|N]
- IETF 82, Taipei (Hyatt and TICC) [Y|N]
- IETF 81, Québec (Hilton) [Y|N]
- IETF 80, Prague (Hilton) [Y|N]
- IETF 73, Minneapolis (Hilton) [Y|N]

I suppose we could just add every venue from the last _n_ years, but
I'm reluctant to do that because I think it will give too many
options. 

I seem to recall at least some of the previous post-meeting surveys
asking this question about the venue we were just in.  I think it
would be interesting, however, to pick a few popular venues and track
their ratings over time.

This is merely a suggestion for the IAOC, and I hope they feel free to
treat it as a bad idea.  (It's also the last I have to say on this
topic, since I've used up my bit quota.)

Best,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
a...@anvilwalrusden.com

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Sam Hartman]

I'd strongly prefer the IETF to focus on going to places where we get
work done and where costs can be controlled.
I'd prefer to avoid tourist destinations to some extent even if they are
not more expensive, but definitely if they are.
I want to present a professional image to my clients and I want to go to
IETf meetings with people who are there to get work done, not to tour.

So, for US meetings I agree with the following:


>[RS> ] +1 and no employer ever argued that going to Minneapolis was a
>boondoggle.  The Hilton in Minneapolis  of all the IETF meetings I ve
>attended has the most optimal layout of meeting rooms etc.
 
>If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the best
>choice IMHO.  It's very reasonably priced, easy for many to get to and the
>hotel has adequate space for us (even back when we had many more
>attendees).  Personally, the weather is not critical to me, since I spend
>the vast majority of my time in the hotel meeting rooms, so I'm very happy
>if we meet there in March and November.   

RE: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)]

Why the survey should limit it to the last five meetings...
In the long history we experienced additional good places
So maybe the survey should be more open and let each list his 3-5 favorable 
places based on the experience from earlier meetings?
Best regards,
Nurit

-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext 
Andrew Sullivan
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 6:11 PM
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

Dear colleagues,

On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 10:42:10AM -0400, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote:

> I expect that a chunk of the variance hinges on the qualifier

While the vagaries of air transport costs fascinate me, I'm not sure
how the question of the cost of one route at one time for one person
is broadly relevant.  The basic fact of having meetings in multiple
places (which is a direct consequence of trying to spread the pain of
travel) is that sometimes each of us will have an expensive flight.
(This is the same reason that I think confusing the
scheduling-in-advance question with the venue question is a bad idea.)

Dave Crocker's original point was that some venues are "good enough"
that you can tune them to be better.  I was sceptical, but upthread we
had two proposals: Minneapolis and Prague.  Nobody seems to have
argued against.

Any others?  At the plenary in Vancouver we heard "go here again", and
we've already decided to run that trial in any case.  That makes
three.  Also, many people expressed satisfaction in Québec.

Vancouver's Pacific location notwithstanding, this appears to me to
suggest that we have one "repeat" location in Europe and two in North
America.  This leaves us rather thin in Asia-Pacific.  I recall people
saying good things about Taipei.  

The point of all this, in case it isn't clear, is to ask to add a
question to the post-meeting survey about specific venues and whether
future meetings should try to return to them.  Given Arrow paradoxes
and so on, I think a short list with "yes/no" for each is much more
likely to yield useful aggregate results than a big list or a rank
order.  So, I'd like to suggest the following survey item be added to
the post-Vancouver survey:

Do you support the IETF returning to the very same venue (hotel
and meeting facilities) as the last time in the following
meetings:

- IETF 84, Vancouver (Hyatt) [Y|N]
- IETF 82, Taipei (Hyatt and TICC) [Y|N]
- IETF 81, Québec (Hilton) [Y|N]
- IETF 80, Prague (Hilton) [Y|N]
- IETF 73, Minneapolis (Hilton) [Y|N]

I suppose we could just add every venue from the last _n_ years, but
I'm reluctant to do that because I think it will give too many
options. 

I seem to recall at least some of the previous post-meeting surveys
asking this question about the venue we were just in.  I think it
would be interesting, however, to pick a few popular venues and track
their ratings over time.

This is merely a suggestion for the IAOC, and I hope they feel free to
treat it as a bad idea.  (It's also the last I have to say on this
topic, since I've used up my bit quota.)

Best,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
a...@anvilwalrusden.com

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Andrew Sullivan]

Dear colleagues,

On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 10:42:10AM -0400, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote:

> I expect that a chunk of the variance hinges on the qualifier

While the vagaries of air transport costs fascinate me, I'm not sure
how the question of the cost of one route at one time for one person
is broadly relevant.  The basic fact of having meetings in multiple
places (which is a direct consequence of trying to spread the pain of
travel) is that sometimes each of us will have an expensive flight.
(This is the same reason that I think confusing the
scheduling-in-advance question with the venue question is a bad idea.)

Dave Crocker's original point was that some venues are "good enough"
that you can tune them to be better.  I was sceptical, but upthread we
had two proposals: Minneapolis and Prague.  Nobody seems to have
argued against.

Any others?  At the plenary in Vancouver we heard "go here again", and
we've already decided to run that trial in any case.  That makes
three.  Also, many people expressed satisfaction in Québec.

Vancouver's Pacific location notwithstanding, this appears to me to
suggest that we have one "repeat" location in Europe and two in North
America.  This leaves us rather thin in Asia-Pacific.  I recall people
saying good things about Taipei.  

The point of all this, in case it isn't clear, is to ask to add a
question to the post-meeting survey about specific venues and whether
future meetings should try to return to them.  Given Arrow paradoxes
and so on, I think a short list with "yes/no" for each is much more
likely to yield useful aggregate results than a big list or a rank
order.  So, I'd like to suggest the following survey item be added to
the post-Vancouver survey:

Do you support the IETF returning to the very same venue (hotel
and meeting facilities) as the last time in the following
meetings:

- IETF 84, Vancouver (Hyatt) [Y|N]
- IETF 82, Taipei (Hyatt and TICC) [Y|N]
- IETF 81, Québec (Hilton) [Y|N]
- IETF 80, Prague (Hilton) [Y|N]
- IETF 73, Minneapolis (Hilton) [Y|N]

I suppose we could just add every venue from the last _n_ years, but
I'm reluctant to do that because I think it will give too many
options. 

I seem to recall at least some of the previous post-meeting surveys
asking this question about the venue we were just in.  I think it
would be interesting, however, to pick a few popular venues and track
their ratings over time.

This is merely a suggestion for the IAOC, and I hope they feel free to
treat it as a bad idea.  (It's also the last I have to say on this
topic, since I've used up my bit quota.)

Best,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
a...@anvilwalrusden.com

RE: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Worley, Dale R (Dale)]

> From: John Levine [jo...@taugh.com]
> 
> >It would have cost me more than twice as much as it did to fly to
> >Beijing, for example, if I had taken a direct flight from DFW
> 
> That's very odd.  I see lots of fares from DFW to YVR from Saturday to
> Saturday via Houston or Denver for in upcoming weeks for under $550,
> and nonstops for $678.

I expect that a chunk of the variance hinges on the qualifier
"direct", which Mary included and Jon did not.  Mary uses a major hub
(DFW) and can plausibly take direct flights to many locations.  I
don't, and I never even consider searching for direct flights.  But
the market for direct flights is likely to be much thinner than the
market for connecting flights, and to be more subject to spot
shortages and the vagaries of how airles have laid out their route
systems.

More disturbing is Mary's later "My indirect flight was $1156.23."
It'd be useful to get information from someone who really knows
airfares as to why that might happen.  But I can see from ITA Software
that even indirect flights DFW-YVR in the near future can easily reach
$650, and higher within the next two weeks.  Tickets BOS-YVR (my
route) have about the same prices.

Dale

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Andrew G. Malis]

+1 to both of Carsten's suggestions.

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Carsten Bormann  wrote:
> On Aug 6, 2012, at 16:41, Mary Barnes  wrote:
>
>> If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the best 
>> choice IMHO.
>
> +1 a lot.
> (If we indeed have to choose the US.)
> Great facility to get work done, good food, reasonable flights.
>
> And add Prague as the staple for Europe.
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Mary Barnes]

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 11:41 PM, John R Levine  wrote:

> The thing is that I don't need a flight to DFW to YVR for this coming week
>> and I don't see the prices you do either.  I did not buy my tickets at the
>> last minute and believe it or not, I'm actually not lying about what I
>> paid
>> for my tickets to YVR nor to Beijing.   I made a very simple statement of
>> fact based on my own experiences.  I can't fathom why you felt obligated
>> to
>> spend time trying to show that I was lying.
>>
>
> Sigh.  If you'll review my previous messages, you'll note that I never
> said you were lying.  Is there some reason that it's important to put words
> in people's mouths?
>
> But since non-stop tickets from Dallas to Vancouver are easily available
> for prices far below any plausible price for a ticket to China via aa.com
> and the usual travel agents, something peculiar was evidently going on
> when you bought yours.
>
> [MB] I paid around $962.10 for my ticket to Beijing when we had the IETF
there in Nov 2010.   So, no, there was nothing peculiar except that a
direct flight from DFW to YVR was over $2000 when I was making
reservations.  My indirect flight was $1156.23.   Certainly, if you look
for flights to YVR in a couple weeks, the prices less.  That's because kids
are back in school.  [/MB]

[MB] No - you did not use the noun "liar" or the verb "lying", but when you
tell someone that what they are saying can't possibly be true, that has the
same implication. [/MB]


> R's,
> John
>

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[John R Levine]

The thing is that I don't need a flight to DFW to YVR for this coming week
and I don't see the prices you do either.  I did not buy my tickets at the
last minute and believe it or not, I'm actually not lying about what I paid
for my tickets to YVR nor to Beijing.   I made a very simple statement of
fact based on my own experiences.  I can't fathom why you felt obligated to
spend time trying to show that I was lying.


Sigh.  If you'll review my previous messages, you'll note that I never 
said you were lying.  Is there some reason that it's important to put 
words in people's mouths?


But since non-stop tickets from Dallas to Vancouver are easily available
for prices far below any plausible price for a ticket to China via aa.com
and the usual travel agents, something peculiar was evidently going on
when you bought yours.

R's,
John

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[Mary Barnes]

The thing is that I don't need a flight to DFW to YVR for this coming week
and I don't see the prices you do either.  I did not buy my tickets at the
last minute and believe it or not, I'm actually not lying about what I paid
for my tickets to YVR nor to Beijing.   I made a very simple statement of
fact based on my own experiences.  I can't fathom why you felt obligated to
spend time trying to show that I was lying.

Mary.

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 8:09 PM, John Levine  wrote:

> >Flights to Vancouver from some cities were extremely expensive.  It would
> >have cost me more than twice as much as it did to fly to Beijing, for
> >example, if I had taken a direct flight from DFW - it would have been by
> >far my most expensive IETF airfare ever.
>
> That's very odd.  I see lots of fares from DFW to YVR from Saturday to
> Saturday via Houston or Denver for in upcoming weeks for under $550,
> and nonstops for $678.  (If you can get to Beijing for that price, I'd
> sure like to hear about it.)
>
> Did you perhaps wait until the last minute to buy your tickets, or have
> company rules that require flying on airlines without competitive prices
> to Canada?
>
> Flying to Canada is certainly more expensive than flying within the
> US, but it's not that much more expensive.  I thought the hotel and
> food were all quite reasonable, but it does help that I get the HST
> back.
>
> R's,
> John
>

Re: So, where to repeat? (was: Re: management granularity)

[John Levine]

>Flights to Vancouver from some cities were extremely expensive.  It would
>have cost me more than twice as much as it did to fly to Beijing, for
>example, if I had taken a direct flight from DFW - it would have been by
>far my most expensive IETF airfare ever.

That's very odd.  I see lots of fares from DFW to YVR from Saturday to
Saturday via Houston or Denver for in upcoming weeks for under $550,
and nonstops for $678.  (If you can get to Beijing for that price, I'd
sure like to hear about it.)

Did you perhaps wait until the last minute to buy your tickets, or have
company rules that require flying on airlines without competitive prices
to Canada?

Flying to Canada is certainly more expensive than flying within the
US, but it's not that much more expensive.  I thought the hotel and
food were all quite reasonable, but it does help that I get the HST
back.

R's,
John

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Arturo Servin]

Live, not "leave".

I have some jetlag from my almost 30 hours from Vancouver to Montevideo.

=D
as

On 6 Aug 2012, at 21:38, Arturo Servin wrote:

> 
>   I do. May be you do not leave far enough from IETF venues.
> 
> 
> Regards
> as
> 
> On 6 Aug 2012, at 11:18, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) wrote:
> 
>> I've never been to an IETF meeting where the plane fare has exceeded the 
>> hotel cost for a week. Caveats to that are that I have mostly gone for IETF 
>> recommended hotels, so may have missed particularly cheap hotels, and that I 
>> have only been to North American and Europe (but that statistic includes 
>> Vancouver and the even further away western US cities down to San Diego). 
>> And of course I fly economy, and it's much cheaper including a Saturday 
>> night in your trip, even at the cost of an extra night in a hotel (at least 
>> it is from here). An almost exception was Paris this year where I was 
>> staying fairly cheaply, but that was a cost-shared trip between me and my 
>> employer, and I didn't fly (I went by train - though that's not cheaper, 
>> just better). Paris has cheap(er) hotels and a metro I understand, so I felt 
>> less location constrained.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Christopher Dearlove
>> Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
>> Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
>> BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
>> West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
>> Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
>> chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com
>> 
>> BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
>> Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, 
>> Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
>> Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-----
>> From: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon) 
>> [mailto:nurit.sprec...@nsn.com] 
>> Sent: 06 August 2012 15:07
>> To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan; 
>> ietf@ietf.org
>> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
>> 
>> --! WARNING ! --
>> This message originates from outside our organisation,
>> either from an external partner or from the internet.
>> Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
>> Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters
>> for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.
>> 
>> 
>> When you are not close (time), flight cost may become higher in the priority 
>> (over hotem)
>> Flying to Vancouver for me for example is the most expensive tripeven 
>> though the city is amazing and the host was wonderful!
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext 
>> Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
>> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 4:56 PM
>> To: Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
>> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
>> 
>> Dublin's problem was that the venue was isolated from the city. This has 
>> also been the case with e.g. San Diego. (I'm assuming no personal car.) 
>> Contrast with Minneapolis (and several other places) where you were right in 
>> the city. Being in a city is better for lunch and dinner options, taking a 
>> break to go to a bookshop (or to buy something you forgot to bring) and so 
>> on. (I'm deliberately not including tourism here.)
>> 
>> However at the moment my priorities to make being able to attend possible 
>> would be time (so the closer to me the better - I realise that's impossible 
>> globally), cost (hotel first, flight second, rest is noise) and the ability 
>> to plan ahead to only attend part of the week. This is the current economic 
>> reality. Dublin actually scores quite well on those for me.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Christopher Dearlove
>> Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
>> Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
>> BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
>> West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
>> Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
>> chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com
>> 
>> BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
>> Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, 
>> Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
>> Registered i

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Arturo Servin]

I do. May be you do not leave far enough from IETF venues.


Regards
as

On 6 Aug 2012, at 11:18, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) wrote:

> I've never been to an IETF meeting where the plane fare has exceeded the 
> hotel cost for a week. Caveats to that are that I have mostly gone for IETF 
> recommended hotels, so may have missed particularly cheap hotels, and that I 
> have only been to North American and Europe (but that statistic includes 
> Vancouver and the even further away western US cities down to San Diego). And 
> of course I fly economy, and it's much cheaper including a Saturday night in 
> your trip, even at the cost of an extra night in a hotel (at least it is from 
> here). An almost exception was Paris this year where I was staying fairly 
> cheaply, but that was a cost-shared trip between me and my employer, and I 
> didn't fly (I went by train - though that's not cheaper, just better). Paris 
> has cheap(er) hotels and a metro I understand, so I felt less location 
> constrained.
> 
> -- 
> Christopher Dearlove
> Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
> Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
> BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
> West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
> Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
> chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com
> 
> BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
> Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, 
> Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
> Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon) [mailto:nurit.sprec...@nsn.com] 
> Sent: 06 August 2012 15:07
> To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan; 
> ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
> 
> --! WARNING ! --
> This message originates from outside our organisation,
> either from an external partner or from the internet.
> Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
> Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters
> for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.
> 
> 
> When you are not close (time), flight cost may become higher in the priority 
> (over hotem)
> Flying to Vancouver for me for example is the most expensive tripeven 
> though the city is amazing and the host was wonderful!
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext 
> Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 4:56 PM
> To: Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
> 
> Dublin's problem was that the venue was isolated from the city. This has also 
> been the case with e.g. San Diego. (I'm assuming no personal car.) Contrast 
> with Minneapolis (and several other places) where you were right in the city. 
> Being in a city is better for lunch and dinner options, taking a break to go 
> to a bookshop (or to buy something you forgot to bring) and so on. (I'm 
> deliberately not including tourism here.)
> 
> However at the moment my priorities to make being able to attend possible 
> would be time (so the closer to me the better - I realise that's impossible 
> globally), cost (hotel first, flight second, rest is noise) and the ability 
> to plan ahead to only attend part of the week. This is the current economic 
> reality. Dublin actually scores quite well on those for me.
> 
> -- 
> Christopher Dearlove
> Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
> Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
> BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
> West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
> Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
> chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com
> 
> BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
> Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, 
> Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
> Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of 
> Daniele Ceccarelli
> Sent: 06 August 2012 13:24
> To: Andrew Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
> 
> --! WARNING ! --
> This message originates from outside our organisation,
> either from an external partner or from the internet.
> Keep this in mind if you answer this

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Carsten Bormann]

On Aug 6, 2012, at 16:41, Mary Barnes  wrote:

> If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the best 
> choice IMHO.  

+1 a lot.
(If we indeed have to choose the US.)
Great facility to get work done, good food, reasonable flights.

And add Prague as the staple for Europe.

Grüße, Carsten

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Margaret Wasserman]

+1

On Aug 6, 2012, at 4:32 PM, Richard Shockey wrote:
> [RS> ] +1 and no employer ever argued that going to Minneapolis was a 
> boondoggle.  The Hilton in Minneapolis  of all the IETF meetings I’ve 
> attended has the most optimal layout of meeting rooms etc.
>  
> If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the best 
> choice IMHO.  It's very reasonably priced, easy for many to get to and the 
> hotel has adequate space for us (even back when we had many more attendees).  
> Personally, the weather is not critical to me, since I spend the vast 
> majority of my time in the hotel meeting rooms, so I'm very happy if we meet 
> there in March and November.   
>  

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Michael Richardson]

> I've never been to an IETF meeting where the plane fare has exceeded the
> hotel cost for a week. 

note: I pay my own way, and make all my own arrangements.

The only meetings where my hotel costs exceeded my transporation costs
were the Montreal IETFs (I live in Ottawa).  When I've flown I have
seldom ever been on direct flights.

I *do* avoid the main hotel if the price is poor.  I did get the
Sheraton Wall (backup hotel IETF84), via hotwire.com, which surprised me.

I find staying over saturday night no longer has any affect on my travel
costs. 

I do prefer returning to the same places, and I do like Minneapolis.
(Yes, even in March and November)

I am more concerned that we have three north-american IETFs in a row
(Vancouver, Atlanta, Orlando), and 4 of the next 6 are in North America.
(Not counting Hawaii as North America for the purposes of travel
budgets, or it's be 5/7)

I'm also concerned about going popular places (Quebec, Orlando) during
peak tourist season. 

-- 
Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works 



pgpmbgWROqvNf.pgp
Description: PGP signature

RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Richard Shockey]

 

 

[RS> ] +1 and no employer ever argued that going to Minneapolis was a
boondoggle.  The Hilton in Minneapolis  of all the IETF meetings I’ve
attended has the most optimal layout of meeting rooms etc. 

 

 

If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the best
choice IMHO.  It's very reasonably priced, easy for many to get to and the
hotel has adequate space for us (even back when we had many more attendees).
Personally, the weather is not critical to me, since I spend the vast
majority of my time in the hotel meeting rooms, so I'm very happy if we meet
there in March and November.   

 

Mary

 

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
 wrote:

I've never been to an IETF meeting where the plane fare has exceeded the
hotel cost for a week. Caveats to that are that I have mostly gone for IETF
recommended hotels, so may have missed particularly cheap hotels, and that I
have only been to North American and Europe (but that statistic includes
Vancouver and the even further away western US cities down to San Diego).
And of course I fly economy, and it's much cheaper including a Saturday
night in your trip, even at the cost of an extra night in a hotel (at least
it is from here). An almost exception was Paris this year where I was
staying fairly cheaply, but that was a cost-shared trip between me and my
employer, and I didn't fly (I went by train - though that's not cheaper,
just better). Paris has cheap(er) hotels and a metro I understand, so I felt
less location constrained.


--
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: +44 1245 242194   |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
 
chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre,
Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687


-Original Message-

From: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)
[mailto:nurit.sprec...@nsn.com]
Sent: 06 August 2012 15:07
To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan;
ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

--! WARNING ! --
This message originates from outside our organisation,
either from an external partner or from the internet.
Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters
for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.


When you are not close (time), flight cost may become higher in the priority
(over hotem)
Flying to Vancouver for me for example is the most expensive tripeven
though the city is amazing and the host was wonderful!

-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext
Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 4:56 PM
To: Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

Dublin's problem was that the venue was isolated from the city. This has
also been the case with e.g. San Diego. (I'm assuming no personal car.)
Contrast with Minneapolis (and several other places) where you were right in
the city. Being in a city is better for lunch and dinner options, taking a
break to go to a bookshop (or to buy something you forgot to bring) and so
on. (I'm deliberately not including tourism here.)

However at the moment my priorities to make being able to attend possible
would be time (so the closer to me the better - I realise that's impossible
globally), cost (hotel first, flight second, rest is noise) and the ability
to plan ahead to only attend part of the week. This is the current economic
reality. Dublin actually scores quite well on those for me.

--
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: +44 1245 242194   |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
 
chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre,
Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687


-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Daniele Ceccarelli
Sent: 06 August 2012 13:24
To: Andrew Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

--! WARNING ! --
This message originates from outside our organisation,
either 

RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)]

I made always good experiences with meeting venues in the downtown of hub 
cities with good flight connections.
As a European for me the east coast of North America is better than the west 
coast.

So far my experience was very good with following meeting locations and would 
agree for a repetition: 
Vancouver, Chicago, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Paris, London, Stockholm and 
even Minneapolis (brrr).

Bad experiences were: Dublin (60 min. as a sum to drive for a dinner), 
Maastricht (60 min. as a sum to walk for a dinner), Anaheim (far away from the 
LA airport)

Why don't we actually plan a meeting in Boston, New York, Madrid, or Lisbon?

Cheers, 
Mehmet 


> -Original Message-
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext 
> Andrew
> Sullivan
> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 5:06 AM
> To: ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
> 
> On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 11:58:19AM -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:
> > enough merely to have excellent staff.  We need to go back to the
> > better places and benefit from the learning curve.  This doesn't
> > mean "no new venues" but it means fewer.
> 
> As a practical matter, may I ask about which venues you want to return
> to?  I get your argument in principle, but it seems to me that there
> has been quite a lot of complaining in the past.  The one factor that
> seems to me most likely to reduce complaints -- weather -- is
> evidently beyond the Secretariat's or IAOC's control.
> 
> People seem inclined to return to the Hyatt in Vancouver, elevators
> notwithstanding.  We're going to do that.  (I don't understand why the
> previous Vencouver venue was less desirable -- to me, these venues
> were very similar, and not very far apart.  I note, however, that the
> previous two Vancouver visits were near the end of the year, when it
> rains all the time in Vancouver.)
> 
> People complained at length about the venue in Paris, so I presume
> it's out.
> 
> Some people complained about the hotel room prices and travel expense
> in Taipei, though I heard remarks that it was a good venue.
> Should we try to return there?
> 
> People complained in advance about getting to Québec, although
> afterwards I heard lots of good noises about that venue.  I note that
> the weather was great.  Should we try to return?
> 
> I don't recall much complaining about the Prague venue in 2011, which
> was striking to me because very little seemed different to me compared
> to our first visit there.  Perhaps this is evidence of the "tuning"
> you suggest (ensuring the water bottles were plastic, for instance).
> But I note the weather was excellent.
> 
> Beijing?  I guess Maastricht is out. Anaheim (FWIW, I thought that was
> an example of a terrible location, but many people seemed happy with
> it)?  Hiroshima?  Stockholm?  San Francisco (we thought the crime at
> Paris was bad, yet didn't complain about being smack up against the
> Tenderloin)?  Or there's the old standby, Minneapolis; perhaps we
> could do it in March.  The Dublin venue was panned by large numbers of
> people.  Philadelphia, people complained about expense.  Chicago, too
> (combined with hotel renovations).
> 
> That gets us back through 2007.  Which of the venues do you think we
> should return to, to which we already haven't returned or planned to
> return?  And why?
> 
> For what it's worth, I would not complain about returning to any of
> those venues; I personally had good meetings at all of them except
> Hiroshima, which I missed due to other commitments.  That includes
> both Maastricht and Dublin, which were both apparently trials for
> large numbers of others.
> 
> Best,
> 
> A
> 
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> a...@anvilwalrusden.com

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 01:44:32PM -0400, Scott Brim wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Melinda Shore  wrote:

> > and Vancouver have stood out.  But still, the only really serious
> > consideration for me is whether or not the facilities make it easier
> > to get done the things that need to get done.
> 
> Using those criteria, I would rate Prague and Beijing as good as or
> better than Minneapolis, and cheaper if you avoid the big hotels.

Thanks to Scott and Melinda for demonstrating the problem I saw in the
original position.  Dave's original argument was that by going back to
places instead of finding new ones, we win by being able to tune.  But
I am unable to see from the evidence the kind of agreement on a site
that results in mere tuning.  For _every_ meeting, I can think of some
set of people who will have reservations about the venue for some
reason.  That is not the basis for simple tuning.  Some people (many
of whom are the squeakiest wheels) appear to have internally
inconsistent sets of demands.

I think the people selecting venues -- return or otherwise -- have a
thankless job, and I think that we should stop trying to manage that
job on a list of a thousand people.  "This worked, that didn't" is,
we've heard, useful feedback.  Aside from that, I don't see what more
we have to say.

Best,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
a...@anvilwalrusden.com

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Michal Krsek]

From central Europe perspective - price for airline ticket to Vancouver in 
summer is rocket expensive. I can fly to united states for half price.

So "cheap food" cant beat more than $1.000 extra fee paid to airline.

It does not mean YVR is a bad place, but I'd recommend to be carefull when 
talking about expensiveness.

MK

6. 8. 2012 v 19:44, Scott Brim :

> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Melinda Shore  wrote:
>> feel about various venues.  But even if it did ...  I go to IETF
>> meetings to get work done, and it's been easier some places than others.
>> Minneapolis has consistently had outstanding meeting facilities, and
>> I thought the facilities in Vancouver last week were excellent, too
>> (and the network team did an outstanding job - many thanks!).
>> Inexpensive, edible food is a huge plus, and there again, Minneapolis
>> and Vancouver have stood out.  But still, the only really serious
>> consideration for me is whether or not the facilities make it easier
>> to get done the things that need to get done.
> 
> Using those criteria, I would rate Prague and Beijing as good as or
> better than Minneapolis, and cheaper if you avoid the big hotels.

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Scott Brim]

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Melinda Shore  wrote:
> feel about various venues.  But even if it did ...  I go to IETF
> meetings to get work done, and it's been easier some places than others.
> Minneapolis has consistently had outstanding meeting facilities, and
> I thought the facilities in Vancouver last week were excellent, too
> (and the network team did an outstanding job - many thanks!).
> Inexpensive, edible food is a huge plus, and there again, Minneapolis
> and Vancouver have stood out.  But still, the only really serious
> consideration for me is whether or not the facilities make it easier
> to get done the things that need to get done.

Using those criteria, I would rate Prague and Beijing as good as or
better than Minneapolis, and cheaper if you avoid the big hotels.

Re: So, where to repeat?

[Melinda Shore]

This appears to be turning into a survey.  My views are no doubt colored
by it being difficult, expensive, and slow to get anywhere (I live near
Fairbanks, AK) so travel doesn't figure very prominently into how I
feel about various venues.  But even if it did ...  I go to IETF
meetings to get work done, and it's been easier some places than others.
Minneapolis has consistently had outstanding meeting facilities, and
I thought the facilities in Vancouver last week were excellent, too
(and the network team did an outstanding job - many thanks!).
Inexpensive, edible food is a huge plus, and there again, Minneapolis
and Vancouver have stood out.  But still, the only really serious
consideration for me is whether or not the facilities make it easier
to get done the things that need to get done.

Melinda

RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Dearlove, Christopher (UK)]

My experience is no doubt biased by that one can get directly to most places, 
including Vancouver the last time I went (not this year), from London, and I 
can get to Heathrow in well under two hours.

--
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
chris.dearl...@baesystems.com<mailto:chris.dearl...@baesystems.com> | 
http://www.baesystems.com

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, 
Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687

From: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon) [mailto:nurit.sprec...@nsn.com]
Sent: 06 August 2012 15:59
To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); Mary Barnes
Cc: Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)


*** WARNING ***
This message originates from outside our organisation, either from an external 
partner or the internet.
Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
Please see this 
process<http://intranet.ent.baesystems.com/howwework/security/spotlights/Documents/Dealing%20With%20Suspicious%20Emails.pdf>
 on how to deal with suspicious emails.
To some people it may be "third if  stay a whole week"but for others 
not!
Going to Vancouver is definitely one the most expensive flightsand takes a 
lot of time to get there
Now that I have seen one saying it took him 27 hours to get backI feel 
luckyit took me "only" 24 hoursI left Wednesday late evening and got 
home Friday morning
And no, even if I stayed two more nightsthe cost of the flight was still 
much higher than the price of the hotel...

-  Nurit
From: ext Dearlove, Christopher (UK) [mailto:chris.dearl...@baesystems.com]
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 5:53 PM
To: Mary Barnes
Cc: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon); Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew 
Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

Those prices still sound like a week's hotel costs would exceed them. And I 
would expect the cost of your time to your employer to exceed even that. I'm 
not suggesting airfare prices don't matter, not by any stretch of the 
imagination, just that they are third if you stay a whole week. Or maybe 
fourth, there's also the IETF charge to consider, but that's less flexible 
(week or day) and not highly location dependent. Of course if you go for just a 
day the airfare is quite likely to be number one on the list, unless the 
location is relatively local.

--
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
chris.dearl...@baesystems.com<mailto:chris.dearl...@baesystems.com> | 
http://www.baesystems.com

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, 
Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687

From: Mary Barnes [mailto:mary.ietf.bar...@gmail.com]
Sent: 06 August 2012 15:42
To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
Cc: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon); Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew 
Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org<mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)


*** WARNING ***
This message originates from outside our organisation, either from an external 
partner or the internet.
Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
Please see this 
process<http://intranet.ent.baesystems.com/howwework/security/spotlights/Documents/Dealing%20With%20Suspicious%20Emails.pdf>
 on how to deal with suspicious emails.
Flights to Vancouver from some cities were extremely expensive.  It would have 
cost me more than twice as much as it did to fly to Beijing, for example, if I 
had taken a direct flight from DFW - it would have been by far my most 
expensive IETF airfare ever. I didn't because I was trying to be cost 
conscious.  However, I could have flown to London in the same time it took me 
to get to/from Vancouver and for about the same price.  This is a typical 
problem when we go somewhere when tourists go (for some reason, flying to 
cities in Canada is very popular when the temp in Texas is 110 degrees F). 
Orlando will most likely be just as bad since it is scheduled during a time 
where many schools in DFW area have Spring Break - flight costs right now are 
over $500 ($560).  I can usually fly anywhere in the U.S. for around $300 when 
I book early.  And, of course, I can't book early as my company won't 
re-imburse unless I use their 

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Mary Barnes]

The only reason why a RT direct airfare would not have exceeded hotel costs
was because I came early as I attended another meeting in San JOse just
prior to IETF and I was attending a workshop on Saturday. If I had arrived
on Saturday the direct RT airfare would have exceeded hotel costs.

Mary.

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) <
chris.dearl...@baesystems.com> wrote:

>  Those prices still sound like a week's hotel costs would exceed them.
> And I would expect the cost of your time to your employer to exceed even
> that. I'm not suggesting airfare prices don't matter, not by any stretch of
> the imagination, just that they are third if you stay a whole week. Or
> maybe fourth, there's also the IETF charge to consider, but that's less
> flexible (week or day) and not highly location dependent. Of course if you
> go for just a day the airfare is quite likely to be number one on the list,
> unless the location is relatively local.
>
> ** **
>
> -- 
>
> Christopher Dearlove
>
> Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
> Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
> BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
> West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
> Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
>
> chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com
>
> BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
> Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre,
> Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
> Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Mary Barnes [mailto:mary.ietf.bar...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 06 August 2012 15:42
> *To:* Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
> *Cc:* Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon); Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew
> Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
>  WARNING 
>
> *This message originates from outside our organisation, either from an
> external partner or the internet.***
> *
> Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
> *
> *Please see this 
> process<http://intranet.ent.baesystems.com/howwework/security/spotlights/Documents/Dealing%20With%20Suspicious%20Emails.pdf>on
>  how to deal with suspicious emails.
> *
>
>  Flights to Vancouver from some cities were extremely expensive.  It
> would have cost me more than twice as much as it did to fly to Beijing, for
> example, if I had taken a direct flight from DFW - it would have been by
> far my most expensive IETF airfare ever. I didn't because I was trying to
> be cost conscious.  However, I could have flown to London in the same time
> it took me to get to/from Vancouver and for about the same price.  This is
> a typical problem when we go somewhere when tourists go (for some reason,
> flying to cities in Canada is very popular when the temp in Texas is 110
> degrees F). Orlando will most likely be just as bad since it is
> scheduled during a time where many schools in DFW area have Spring Break -
> flight costs right now are over $500 ($560).  I can usually fly anywhere in
> the U.S. for around $300 when I book early.  And, of course, I can't book
> early as my company won't re-imburse unless I use their travel company and
> have approval (which I won't get for at least another 5-6 months).
> Hopefully, the IETF negotiated hotel rate won't reflect that it is Spring
> Break.   
>
> ** **
>
> If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the
> best choice IMHO.  It's very reasonably priced, easy for many to get to and
> the hotel has adequate space for us (even back when we had many more
> attendees).  Personally, the weather is not critical to me, since I spend
> the vast majority of my time in the hotel meeting rooms, so I'm very happy
> if we meet there in March and November.   
>
> ** **
>
> Mary
>
> ** **
>
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) <
> chris.dearl...@baesystems.com> wrote:
>
> I've never been to an IETF meeting where the plane fare has exceeded the
> hotel cost for a week. Caveats to that are that I have mostly gone for IETF
> recommended hotels, so may have missed particularly cheap hotels, and that
> I have only been to North American and Europe (but that statistic includes
> Vancouver and the even further away western US cities down to San Diego).
> And of course I fly economy, and it's much cheaper including a Saturday
> night in your trip, even at the cost of an extra night in a hotel (at least
> it is from here). An almost exception was Paris this year where I was
> stayi

RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Dearlove, Christopher (UK)]

Those prices still sound like a week's hotel costs would exceed them. And I 
would expect the cost of your time to your employer to exceed even that. I'm 
not suggesting airfare prices don't matter, not by any stretch of the 
imagination, just that they are third if you stay a whole week. Or maybe 
fourth, there's also the IETF charge to consider, but that's less flexible 
(week or day) and not highly location dependent. Of course if you go for just a 
day the airfare is quite likely to be number one on the list, unless the 
location is relatively local.

--
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
chris.dearl...@baesystems.com<mailto:chris.dearl...@baesystems.com> | 
http://www.baesystems.com

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, 
Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687

From: Mary Barnes [mailto:mary.ietf.bar...@gmail.com]
Sent: 06 August 2012 15:42
To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
Cc: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon); Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew 
Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)


*** WARNING ***
This message originates from outside our organisation, either from an external 
partner or the internet.
Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
Please see this 
process<http://intranet.ent.baesystems.com/howwework/security/spotlights/Documents/Dealing%20With%20Suspicious%20Emails.pdf>
 on how to deal with suspicious emails.
Flights to Vancouver from some cities were extremely expensive.  It would have 
cost me more than twice as much as it did to fly to Beijing, for example, if I 
had taken a direct flight from DFW - it would have been by far my most 
expensive IETF airfare ever. I didn't because I was trying to be cost 
conscious.  However, I could have flown to London in the same time it took me 
to get to/from Vancouver and for about the same price.  This is a typical 
problem when we go somewhere when tourists go (for some reason, flying to 
cities in Canada is very popular when the temp in Texas is 110 degrees F). 
Orlando will most likely be just as bad since it is scheduled during a time 
where many schools in DFW area have Spring Break - flight costs right now are 
over $500 ($560).  I can usually fly anywhere in the U.S. for around $300 when 
I book early.  And, of course, I can't book early as my company won't 
re-imburse unless I use their travel company and have approval (which I won't 
get for at least another 5-6 months).   Hopefully, the IETF negotiated hotel 
rate won't reflect that it is Spring Break.

If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the best 
choice IMHO.  It's very reasonably priced, easy for many to get to and the 
hotel has adequate space for us (even back when we had many more attendees).  
Personally, the weather is not critical to me, since I spend the vast majority 
of my time in the hotel meeting rooms, so I'm very happy if we meet there in 
March and November.

Mary

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) 
mailto:chris.dearl...@baesystems.com>> wrote:
I've never been to an IETF meeting where the plane fare has exceeded the hotel 
cost for a week. Caveats to that are that I have mostly gone for IETF 
recommended hotels, so may have missed particularly cheap hotels, and that I 
have only been to North American and Europe (but that statistic includes 
Vancouver and the even further away western US cities down to San Diego). And 
of course I fly economy, and it's much cheaper including a Saturday night in 
your trip, even at the cost of an extra night in a hotel (at least it is from 
here). An almost exception was Paris this year where I was staying fairly 
cheaply, but that was a cost-shared trip between me and my employer, and I 
didn't fly (I went by train - though that's not cheaper, just better). Paris 
has cheap(er) hotels and a metro I understand, so I felt less location 
constrained.

--
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 
242124
chris.dearl...@baesystems.com<mailto:chris.dearl...@baesystems.com> | 
http://www.baesystems.com

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, 
Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687


-Original Message-
From: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon) 
[mailto

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Mary Barnes]

Flights to Vancouver from some cities were extremely expensive.  It would
have cost me more than twice as much as it did to fly to Beijing, for
example, if I had taken a direct flight from DFW - it would have been by
far my most expensive IETF airfare ever. I didn't because I was trying to
be cost conscious.  However, I could have flown to London in the same time
it took me to get to/from Vancouver and for about the same price.  This is
a typical problem when we go somewhere when tourists go (for some reason,
flying to cities in Canada is very popular when the temp in Texas is 110
degrees F). Orlando will most likely be just as bad since it is
scheduled during a time where many schools in DFW area have Spring Break -
flight costs right now are over $500 ($560).  I can usually fly anywhere in
the U.S. for around $300 when I book early.  And, of course, I can't book
early as my company won't re-imburse unless I use their travel company and
have approval (which I won't get for at least another 5-6 months).
Hopefully, the IETF negotiated hotel rate won't reflect that it is Spring
Break.

If we were to choose one place in the U.S. to meet, Minneapolis is the best
choice IMHO.  It's very reasonably priced, easy for many to get to and the
hotel has adequate space for us (even back when we had many more
attendees).  Personally, the weather is not critical to me, since I spend
the vast majority of my time in the hotel meeting rooms, so I'm very happy
if we meet there in March and November.

Mary

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) <
chris.dearl...@baesystems.com> wrote:

> I've never been to an IETF meeting where the plane fare has exceeded the
> hotel cost for a week. Caveats to that are that I have mostly gone for IETF
> recommended hotels, so may have missed particularly cheap hotels, and that
> I have only been to North American and Europe (but that statistic includes
> Vancouver and the even further away western US cities down to San Diego).
> And of course I fly economy, and it's much cheaper including a Saturday
> night in your trip, even at the cost of an extra night in a hotel (at least
> it is from here). An almost exception was Paris this year where I was
> staying fairly cheaply, but that was a cost-shared trip between me and my
> employer, and I didn't fly (I went by train - though that's not cheaper,
> just better). Paris has cheap(er) hotels and a metro I understand, so I
> felt less location constrained.
>
> --
> Christopher Dearlove
> Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
> Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
> BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
> West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
> Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
> chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com
>
> BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
> Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre,
> Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
> Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon) [mailto:
> nurit.sprec...@nsn.com]
> Sent: 06 August 2012 15:07
> To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan;
> ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
>
> --! WARNING ! --
> This message originates from outside our organisation,
> either from an external partner or from the internet.
> Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
> Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters
> for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.
> 
>
> When you are not close (time), flight cost may become higher in the
> priority (over hotem)
> Flying to Vancouver for me for example is the most expensive tripeven
> though the city is amazing and the host was wonderful!
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> ext Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 4:56 PM
> To: Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)
>
> Dublin's problem was that the venue was isolated from the city. This has
> also been the case with e.g. San Diego. (I'm assuming no personal car.)
> Contrast with Minneapolis (and several other places) where you were right
> in the city. Being in a city is better for lunch and dinner options, taking
> a break to go to a bookshop (or to buy something you forgot to bring) and
> so on. (I'm deliberately not including tourism here.)
>
> However 

RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Dearlove, Christopher (UK)]

Three options. The two you mention and not going. Yes, advance scheduling is 
new to this discussion this time, and yes it's not done. But it does have a 
real impact once time/cost becomes sufficiently critical that days count.

-- 
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, 
Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687


-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Andrew 
Sullivan
Sent: 06 August 2012 15:30
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

--! WARNING ! --
This message originates from outside our organisation,
either from an external partner or from the internet.
Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters
for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.


On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 01:55:59PM +, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) wrote:
 
> is noise) and the ability to plan ahead to only attend part of the
> week.

That topic imports a completely new one to this discussion: advance
scheduling of the meetings. If there is any principle for repeating a
venue to be found (I'm a sceptic, but let's see), then advance
scheduling can't enter into it because the lack of advance scheduling
is the same at every meeting. So, for the purposes of this discussion,
you have two options: plan well in advance to be there for the entire
week, or plan to buy plane tickets after the agenda is finalized.

Best,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
a...@anvilwalrusden.com



This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.

Re: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 01:55:59PM +, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) wrote:
 
> is noise) and the ability to plan ahead to only attend part of the
> week.

That topic imports a completely new one to this discussion: advance
scheduling of the meetings. If there is any principle for repeating a
venue to be found (I'm a sceptic, but let's see), then advance
scheduling can't enter into it because the lack of advance scheduling
is the same at every meeting. So, for the purposes of this discussion,
you have two options: plan well in advance to be there for the entire
week, or plan to buy plane tickets after the agenda is finalized.

Best,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
a...@anvilwalrusden.com

RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

[Dearlove, Christopher (UK)]

I've never been to an IETF meeting where the plane fare has exceeded the hotel 
cost for a week. Caveats to that are that I have mostly gone for IETF 
recommended hotels, so may have missed particularly cheap hotels, and that I 
have only been to North American and Europe (but that statistic includes 
Vancouver and the even further away western US cities down to San Diego). And 
of course I fly economy, and it's much cheaper including a Saturday night in 
your trip, even at the cost of an extra night in a hotel (at least it is from 
here). An almost exception was Paris this year where I was staying fairly 
cheaply, but that was a cost-shared trip between me and my employer, and I 
didn't fly (I went by train - though that's not cheaper, just better). Paris 
has cheap(er) hotels and a metro I understand, so I felt less location 
constrained.

-- 
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, 
Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687


-Original Message-
From: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon) [mailto:nurit.sprec...@nsn.com] 
Sent: 06 August 2012 15:07
To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan; 
ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

--! WARNING ! --
This message originates from outside our organisation,
either from an external partner or from the internet.
Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters
for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.


When you are not close (time), flight cost may become higher in the priority 
(over hotem)
Flying to Vancouver for me for example is the most expensive tripeven 
though the city is amazing and the host was wonderful!

-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext 
Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 4:56 PM
To: Daniele Ceccarelli; Andrew Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

Dublin's problem was that the venue was isolated from the city. This has also 
been the case with e.g. San Diego. (I'm assuming no personal car.) Contrast 
with Minneapolis (and several other places) where you were right in the city. 
Being in a city is better for lunch and dinner options, taking a break to go to 
a bookshop (or to buy something you forgot to bring) and so on. (I'm 
deliberately not including tourism here.)

However at the moment my priorities to make being able to attend possible would 
be time (so the closer to me the better - I realise that's impossible 
globally), cost (hotel first, flight second, rest is noise) and the ability to 
plan ahead to only attend part of the week. This is the current economic 
reality. Dublin actually scores quite well on those for me.

-- 
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
chris.dearl...@baesystems.com | http://www.baesystems.com

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, 
Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687


-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Daniele 
Ceccarelli
Sent: 06 August 2012 13:24
To: Andrew Sullivan; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: So, where to repeat? (was:Re: management granularity)

--! WARNING ! --
This message originates from outside our organisation,
either from an external partner or from the internet.
Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters
for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.


Dublin panned? I thought it was one of the best venues and locations of the 
last meetings.

What about Italy or Spain? I've never heard about an IETF in Italy. I'm ok with 
meetings outside Italy since i like traveling very much, but i was wondering 
why it has never been taken into account in the past meetings. Is it expensive? 
I think Italy and Spain are much cheaper than France, UK or Sweden, aren