Re: Wireless in future meetings
John C Klensin wrote: Folks, the Secretariat is quite good at this stuff. No argument there. :-) -- /=\ |John Stracke |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | |Principal Engineer|http://www.centive.com| |Centive |My opinions are my own. | |=| |Rope is rope, and string is string, and never the twine shall| |meet.| \=/
Re: Wireless in future meetings
Folks, the Secretariat is quite good at this stuff. Really. The odds that they are going to book us into a hotel where we can't work effectively --especially along a dimension as easily understood as this one-- are, I think (reinforced by all of our experience since Houston), low enough that it really isn't worth the cost of the bits on this list to speculate about what various hotels might choose to do to individual guests. Even when hotels have restrictive or expensive policies, those arrangements are typically negotiable if one is bringing them a very large meeting. And Marriott is unlikely to sign a deal with T-Mobile, or anyone else, that is sufficiently exclusive to cost them meeting or convention business from groups that need levels of network service that T-Mobile can't/doesn't offer. The situation would be different, of course, if it were impossible to run two different 802.11b networks in the same facility, but that is why there are network identifiers. And, again, the Secretariat is, in my experience, very good at those types of negotiations. I'm almost positive we can find something more threatening to worry about :-( regards, john --On Friday, 20 December, 2002 09:47 -0800 Joe Touch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: John Stracke wrote: Pekka Savola wrote: I would imagine that the IETF as _customers of the hotel_ can do pretty much what it wants. Depends on Marriott's contract with Wayport--it probably specifies some degree of exclusivity. But Wayport might be happy to grant an exception when they learn the volume of traffic an IETF meeting puts out. :-) Some places charge a "corkage" fee for running your own network when they have one too, even if they don't provide what you want (i.e., NAT). FWIW. Joe
Re: Wireless in future meetings
Marriott's announcement was that they had signed an agreement with T-Mobile to provide the 802.11b network services. This is the same company that provides the services at Starbucks in the U.S. My personal opinion is that the service is pretty poor. The available subscription plans are enumerated here for the U.S.: http://www.t-mobile.com/hotspot/services_plans.htm Joe Touch wrote: Some places charge a "corkage" fee for running your own network when they have one too, even if they don't provide what you want (i.e., NAT). FWIW. Joe
Re: Wireless in future meetings
John Stracke wrote: Pekka Savola wrote: I would imagine that the IETF as _customers of the hotel_ can do pretty much what it wants. Depends on Marriott's contract with Wayport--it probably specifies some degree of exclusivity. But Wayport might be happy to grant an exception when they learn the volume of traffic an IETF meeting puts out. :-) Some places charge a "corkage" fee for running your own network when they have one too, even if they don't provide what you want (i.e., NAT). FWIW. Joe
Re: Wireless in future meetings
Pekka Savola wrote: I would imagine that the IETF as _customers of the hotel_ can do pretty much what it wants. Depends on Marriott's contract with Wayport--it probably specifies some degree of exclusivity. But Wayport might be happy to grant an exception when they learn the volume of traffic an IETF meeting puts out. :-) -- /===\ |John Stracke |[EMAIL PROTECTED]| |Principal Engineer|http://www.centive.com | |Centive |My opinions are my own. | |===| |"I only wish I had time to get married myself, as I've told| |m'wife many's the time." | \===/
Re: Wireless in future meetings
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It sort of had to start happening. Marriott apparently aims to provide wireless access at 400 hotels in Germany, the U.K. and the U.S. FWIW, wireless access != being on the Internet Many places use NATs and/or firewalls, or require registered MAC addresses (some require that the registration be done 'from that MAC'). For all those reasons, it's not yet clear whether Marriot's style of 'access' is what the IETF requires. For example, many IETF hotels have had Wayport access in the bedrooms, but few of us would accept that for the meeting as a whole. Joe
Re: Wireless in future meetings
On Fri, 20 Dec 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] > So what then for future meetings? > > Will they let us play alongside for "free" if we promise to be v6 only? > > On the other hand imagine wireless-free WG sessions! I would imagine that the IETF as _customers of the hotel_ can do pretty much what it wants. Note: I'm making an assumption that having an IETF in a hotel is good business for the hotel, an offer it couldn't refuse. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords
Wireless in future meetings
It sort of had to start happening. Marriott apparently aims to provide wireless access at 400 hotels in Germany, the U.K. and the U.S. <> http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/12/19/021219hnmarriott.xml?s=IDG NS In the same article its says that T-Mobile will charge prices starting at $8.16 for one hour. (ouch!) And for exactly what kind of connectivity? So what then for future meetings? Will they let us play alongside for "free" if we promise to be v6 only? On the other hand imagine wireless-free WG sessions! Just thinking forward... Gordon
