Re: voting system for future venues?

On 24/08/2011 23:12, Keith Moore wrote: > Maybe there needs to be some sort of voting system for future venues. First of all, remember that the community asked for venue selections 2 to 3 years in advance. I don't think that many people can predict if they will attend a meeting 2 years from now.

Re: IAOC, travel and hotel prices (was RE: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?)

On 8/25/2011 12:10 PM, Melinda Shore wrote: > On 8/24/11 9:05 PM, Glen Zorn wrote: >> I think that a large part of the problem is that the IAOC is attempting >> to satisfy policies based upon consensus. > > Really? Consensus of whom? I haven't seen anything remotely > like consensus on much to

Re: IAOC, travel and hotel prices (was RE: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?)

At 12:05 PM +0700 8/25/11, Glen Zorn wrote: Most people seem to want to be able to commute to sessions by (at most) walking across the street, more preferably via elevator. A large conveniently located bar is very popular, as well. These are factors which help contribute to a successful

Re: IAOC, travel and hotel prices (was RE: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?)

On 8/24/11 9:05 PM, Glen Zorn wrote: I think that a large part of the problem is that the IAOC is attempting to satisfy policies based upon consensus. Really? Consensus of whom? I haven't seen anything remotely like consensus on much to do with meeting logistics. Closest we seem to have come

Re: IAOC, travel and hotel prices (was RE: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?)

On 8/24/2011 8:31 PM, George, Wesley wrote: > I’ve been watching this discussion across several attendee lists, > plenaries, etc and it appears that we have a routing loop. > > > > Perhaps it’s time for those who seem most concerned about this to author > a BCP draft regarding IETF meeting venu

RE: voting system for future venues?

Hi Ole, If Sofitel Manila, will not be enough space for a 5 to 6 sessions @ 200 seats at same time there is a larger spaces around that area, Either SMX / Mall of Asia or our World Trade Center, Manila. We welcome you to our beautiful country, Philippines. Regards, Medel +

Re: voting system for future venues?

Right, and I apologize for the wording. 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, 24 Aug 2011, a...@anvilwalrusden.com wro

Re: voting system for future venues?

At 4:32 PM -0700 8/24/11, Ole Jacobsen wrote: I think the only way to get HQ hotel rates down is to go to the sort of places that the IETF seems to not want to go. One of the cheapest places to fly to in the world is Las Vegas. You can also get really good hotel rates there, group or individ

Re: voting system for future venues?

--On Wednesday, August 24, 2011 21:56 -0500 Pete Resnick wrote: >... >> Just a reminder, the community VOTED for Quebec City. >> >> Backing up Dave here, the community repeatedly VOTES or, in >> post-meeting surveys, INDICATES (VOTES) for the sort of >> venues we have been booking. > > OK,

Re: voting system for future venues?

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 03:07:59PM -0700, Ole Jacobsen wrote: > > "doesn't look that good in terms of iaoc performance over time." > > Are you seriously suggesting that we are looking for more and more > expensive venues over time? Do you not think there might be some > factors such as infla

Re: voting system for future venues?

On 2011-08-25 13:42, somebody other than Ole Jacobsen wrote: > "I agree that IAOC should > ensure that there are inexpensive hotels nearby so that > those with a tight budget can save money." This is the key point. The anchor hotel, especially when there is a convention centre involved, is quite

RE: voting system for future venues?

Medel, The Sofitel Manila is where APRICOT 2009 was held. A great venue, possibly even large enough to hold an IETF (I am not sure), *and* the rate (at the time) at 7,525 Pesos was pretty good. Today it is $177 which is still pretty good. The question is: would the IETF go to the Philippines for

Re: voting system for future venues?

Stephen, Thanks. 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. I'm not assuming that it's the IAOC's fault, but the numbers are bad. Regards Brian O

Re: voting system for future venues?

On 8/24/11 3:55 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote: Sorry, but the vote on Quebec City, and the recent, follow-on commentary are far more substantial and proportionally dominant than a "vocal minority". On 8/24/11 4:48 PM, Eric Burger wrote: Just a reminder, the community VOTED for Quebec City. Backin

Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-krb-wg-otp-preauth-18

>writes: > [1] In section 6.1 at the top of p.28, I don't believe that the > use of lower case "recommended" is a strong enough warning about > the danger in using anonymous PKINIT because it exposes the OTP > value: >It is therefore recommended that anonymous PKI

RE: voting system for future venues?

Hi, Likewise but I'm Medel Ramirez, working in a Telco here in the Philippines (Makati City). Have been following a lot of technical discussions; likewise in this matter, would like to extend a hand in this issue. For you know I have already hosted a lot of Technical Events and one of the bigge

Re: voting system for future venues?

I have been asked to post the following for someone who does not wish to be identified: "I work for a large company that can afford to pay fairly high room rates at the official HQ hotel. I'm willing to do so as a way to help the IETF get free meeting rooms and thereby keep the meeting fee low,

Re: voting system for future venues?

On Thu, 25 Aug 2011, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > I didn't say that. I said that IETF meeting hotel prices have > risen more than 20% above inflation. I have no idea if average > hotel prices for setups like ours have done that, or if the > IETF attendees are really getting a bad deal. I think the

Re: voting system for future venues?

On 08/25/2011 01:55 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote: and what I'm saying is the current venue is 10% more expensive now then when negotiated. Ok. I don't know that that information ("when negotiated") is public. so is your deviation 10% 20% etc. Not that simple. The model I used is based on 6-me

Re: voting system for future venues?

On Aug 24, 2011, at 5:40 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > > On 08/24/2011 11:43 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote: >> >> On Aug 24, 2011, at 3:24 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: >>> Inflation is accounted for in the figures given. We're >>> still>20% above inflation in terms of hotel prices based >>> on these f

Re: voting system for future venues?

On Aug 24, 2011, at 5:35 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > >> The University Campus, or maybe "University Conference Center" idea >> is worth exploring, such places do exist (in Atlanta for example), >> but, as others have pointed out, we need to clearly define what the >> goal is here and recognize th

Re: voting system for future venues?

On 08/24/2011 11:43 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote: On Aug 24, 2011, at 3:24 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: Inflation is accounted for in the figures given. We're still>20% above inflation in terms of hotel prices based on these figures. You might claim hotel price inflation is higher than the overall,

Re: voting system for future venues?

On 08/25/2011 12:32 AM, Ole Jacobsen wrote: Sorry, I wasn't trying to suggest a bad faith situation, just reacting to your WORDING :-) Hmmm. You accused me of suggesting bad faith so the above is correct I guess. I agree that hotel prices have risen I didn't say that. I said that IETF me

Re: voting system for future venues?

Having organized (or tried to…) conferences at a US university, some caveats: - You can get cheap housing, but only in the summer and some places. (I recently stayed at the U. of Toronto for $38/night, albeit having showers down the hall may not be everybody's cup of tea. Rates in Columbia summe

Re: voting system for future venues?

Sorry, I wasn't trying to suggest a bad faith situation, just reacting to your WORDING :-) I agree that hotel prices have risen and that isn't limited to the venues under consideration by the IETF. NANOG and APRICOT hotel rates have gone up as have other meeting hotel rates, and certainly the

Re: [IETF] Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 18:44 -0400, Warren Kumari wrote: > And I've concluded that the IAOC have a crappy job to do and that folk like > to kvetch. > > If they found a private Caribbean island with free flights and a 5 star > resort for $10USD per night, *someone* would complain that the sand wa

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 16:27 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: > > "Dave" == Dave CROCKER writes: > > Dave> ps. As a personal aside, I'll note that I've lobbied rather > Dave> vigorously for venues that entail less travel effort, by > Dave> eliminating the additional hop needed to get fro

Re: voting system for future venues?

On Aug 24, 2011, at 3:24 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > Inflation is accounted for in the figures given. We're > still >20% above inflation in terms of hotel prices based > on these figures. > > You might claim hotel price inflation is higher than the > overall, I don't know. I would hope the iaoc

Re: [IETF] Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On Aug 24, 2011, at 5:28 PM, Thomas Narten wrote: > Geoff Mulligan writes: > >> Maybe the majority doesn't care one way or the other - they will just go >> wherever the meetings are held in which case: >> let's make them easy to get to >> cheap >> decent food >> one roof (with other hotels

Re: voting system for future venues?

On 08/24/2011 11:07 PM, Ole Jacobsen wrote: "doesn't look that good in terms of iaoc performance over time." Are you seriously suggesting that we are looking for more and more expensive venues over time? No. And obviously not. I don't see how it helps to suggest that either. > Do you n

Re: Last Call: (Message Submission for Mail) to Full Standard

--On August 11, 2011 6:37:52 -0700 The IESG wrote: The IESG has received a request from the Yet Another Mail WG (yam) to consider the following document: - 'Message Submission for Mail' as a Full Standard I have read this draft and support advancing it to Full Standard as written or with m

Re: voting system for future venues?

"doesn't look that good in terms of iaoc performance over time." Are you seriously suggesting that we are looking for more and more expensive venues over time? Do you not think there might be some factors such as inflation, currency fluctuations, general cost increases (oil prices perhaps)

Re: voting system for future venues?

On Aug 24, 2011, at 5:48 PM, Eric Burger wrote: > Let's ask again: what is it you WANT? Personally, I want to be able to afford to travel to the meetings, and to be able to do so without having to commit to spending the money months in advance. More broadly, I want IETF meetings to be accessibl

Re: voting system for future venues?

> Let's ask again: what is it you WANT? Eric, haven't I been clear enough? I want a pony! (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=I%20want%20a%20pony) :-) Thomas ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: voting system for future venues?

Just a reminder, the community VOTED for Quebec City. Backing up Dave here, the community repeatedly VOTES or, in post-meeting surveys, INDICATES (VOTES) for the sort of venues we have been booking. Let me say it one more time: I have stayed at hotels for between one-half and one-seventh the pr

Re: voting system for future venues?

Keith, I would be amazed if any major hotel or convention centre would allow its bid to be made public in this way. I too am disturbed by the Taipei hotel rate, but I know from my own time on the IAOC that matching bids, dates, hosts and all the other constraints is essentially an insoluble proble

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On 24 Aug 2011, at 21:58, Donald Eastlake wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Geoff Mulligan > wrote: >> >> ... >> >> You could pick Rosemont, IL (next to O'hare) for every meeting (oops, >> sorry - misses on decent food). > > Minneapolis or Chicago, one place doesn't make it. The poli

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

Geoff Mulligan writes: > Maybe the majority doesn't care one way or the other - they will just go > wherever the meetings are held in which case: > let's make them easy to get to > cheap > decent food > one roof (with other hotels near-by) > cheap > and easy to get to Having watched

voting system for future venues?

Maybe there needs to be some sort of voting system for future venues. 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. (say by putting down a deposit toward meeting fees). I

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011, Dave CROCKER wrote: > ps. Underlying any sort of change to the model is a change in the nature of > host/sponsor recruitment. The current approach uses new venues to aid in > finding new sponsors. Not quite. But you are correct that sponsors/hosts often strongly influence

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Geoff Mulligan wrote: > > ... > > You could pick Rosemont, IL (next to O'hare) for every meeting (oops, > sorry - misses on decent food). Minneapolis or Chicago, one place doesn't make it. The policy of the IETF has been to meet where the attendees come from, alth

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On 08/24/2011 12:23 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote: But it's worse than "relatively large percent". There's absolutely no minority constituency that is vocal about wanting this to change. That's why I declared myself giving up on this topic. I wonder how many of us have done exactly this. One of the m

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On 8/24/2011 1:34 PM, geoff wrote: I agree. I think that there is a vocal minority that wants this. I don't think that community as a whole really cares. Sorry, but the vote on Quebec City, and the recent, follow-on commentary are far more substantial and proportionally dominant than a "v

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On Aug 24, 2011, at 4:33 PM, Alia Atlas wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote: > > > On 8/24/2011 1:27 PM, Sam Hartman wrote: > Can you start by backing up the assertion that the community has > vigrously expressed a preference for interesting venues? > I may just need

Re: IAOC, travel and hotel prices (was RE: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?)

At 10:49 AM -0700 8/24/11, SM wrote: Is there any hypothesis about why this type of discussion does not occur when a venue in the U.S. is selected? Maybe because when the venue is in the U.S., hotel prices tend to be lower, and immigration hassles (fingerprints and rude treatment) and visa

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote: > > > On 8/24/2011 1:27 PM, Sam Hartman wrote: > >> Can you start by backing up the assertion that the community has >> vigrously expressed a preference for interesting venues? >> I may just need a new IETF community:-) >> > > > gosh, I hadn't

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On 8/24/2011 1:27 PM, Sam Hartman wrote: Can you start by backing up the assertion that the community has vigrously expressed a preference for interesting venues? I may just need a new IETF community:-) gosh, I hadn't thought that that was less than obvious, given the vote for quebec and m

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

Maybe the majority doesn't care one way or the other - they will just go wherever the meetings are held in which case: let's make them easy to get to cheap decent food one roof (with other hotels near-by) cheap and easy to get to You could pick Rosemont, IL (next to O'hare) for every m

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

> "Dave" == Dave CROCKER writes: Dave> ps. As a personal aside, I'll note that I've lobbied rather Dave> vigorously for venues that entail less travel effort, by Dave> eliminating the additional hop needed to get from a major hub. Dave> Note that that has gotten essentially z

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On 8/24/11 2:23 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote: > > > On 8/24/2011 1:18 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> As long as a relatively large percentage of IETF folks see meetings as >> an opportunity to sight-see, I don't think we'll see much support for >> rotating among a small set of major hub locations. >

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On 8/24/2011 1:18 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: As long as a relatively large percentage of IETF folks see meetings as an opportunity to sight-see, I don't think we'll see much support for rotating among a small set of major hub locations. +1 But it's worse than "relatively large percent". T

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 15:28 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: > 1) We don't have to go to any particular location. There has been an > assumption made by people in this discussion that sometimes when we pick > locations with particularly expensive hotels, we'll get particularly > expensive meetings. That

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On 8/24/11 2:11 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote: > ps. As a personal aside, I'll note that I've lobbied rather vigorously > for venues that entail less travel effort, by eliminating the additional > hop needed to get from a major hub. Note that that has gotten > essentially zero support from the communit

Re: Is the IAOC responsive?

On 8/24/2011 1:01 PM, Steve Crocker wrote: 2. I did not discuss this with him. In general, we have different value sets with respect to meetings (and many other things). oh? d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net ___ Ietf

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On 8/24/2011 12:28 PM, Sam Hartman wrote: I feel that a lot of concerns have been raised, and I don't find the responses very convincing. As the new guy on the IAOC block, I'm still learning the complexities of IETF venue planning. Perhaps you can list the concerns that have been raised a

Is the IAOC responsive?

In response to Sam's comment re whether the IAOC is responsive and/or transparent, if this is indeed a problem it needs to be fixed. As a founding member of the IAOC, I can attest that these two qualities, responsiveness and transparency, were the driving concerns that led to the creation of th

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

Let me just point out that the IETF community has expressed a strong preference for: * "One roof" venues, meeting space in HQ hotel or HQ hotel next to convention center. * Cities, not resorts, because the former yields many more accomodation options for those who wish to stay in HQ hotel

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 15:09, Melinda Shore wrote: > On 08/24/2011 07:47 AM, Keith Moore wrote: >> >> Maybe they don't realize it, but at that point they're >> actively working to exclude participation from those not supported by >> large companies or governments. > > It seems to me that this is

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

> "Melinda" == Melinda Shore writes: Melinda> On 08/24/2011 07:47 AM, Keith Moore wrote: >> Maybe they don't realize it, but at that point they're actively >> working to exclude participation from those not supported by >> large companies or governments. Melinda> It seems

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On 08/24/2011 07:47 AM, Keith Moore wrote: Maybe they don't realize it, but at that point they're actively working to exclude participation from those not supported by large companies or governments. It seems to me that this is a very, very important point. Melinda

Re: IAOC, travel and hotel prices (was RE: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?)

At 06:31 24-08-2011, George, Wesley wrote: Perhaps it’s time for those who seem most concerned about this to author a BCP draft regarding IETF meeting venue and hotel selection policies that addresses this, so that See draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04 (expired). IAOC has

Re: Last Call: (The Web Origin Concept) to Proposed Standard

Hi, a clear definition of "same origin" on standards track is a good thing. Maybe some details could be improved: 1 - , maybe I miss the point, but that is apparently the same as LWSP with an additional SHOULD to produce only a single SP. If that is the case just saying LWSP would be clea

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On Aug 24, 2011, at 9:34 AM, George, Wesley wrote: > From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Keith > Moore > Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 8:37 AM > To: Ray Pelletier > Cc: John C Klensin; Secretariat IETF; IETF-Discussion list; Lixia Zhang > Subject: Re: Hyatt

RE: [OSPF] [karp] Last Call: (Supporting Authentication Trailer for OSPFv3) to Proposed Standard

Hi Acee, > >> > >> We change the hex that's repeated in the Apad from > 0x878FE1F3 to 0x878FE1F4. This value will be unique for > OSPFv3. Other protocols that use this mechanism must use a > different value of Apad - you could think of this as > "salting" the Apad. > > > > Could we simply us

Re: [OSPF] [karp] Last Call: (Supporting Authentication Trailer for OSPFv3) to Proposed Standard

On Aug 24, 2011, at 10:44 AM, Acee Lindem wrote: > > > Hi Manav, > > On Aug 24, 2011, at 10:39 AM, Bhatia, Manav (Manav) wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> [clipped] >> >>> >>> Based on this review I have a few recommendations for the >>> OSPF v3 authentication trailers document. >>> >>> 1) The v3 a

Re: [OSPF] [karp] Last Call: (Supporting Authentication Trailer for OSPFv3) to Proposed Standard

Hi Manav, On Aug 24, 2011, at 10:39 AM, Bhatia, Manav (Manav) wrote: > Hi, > > [clipped] > >> >> Based on this review I have a few recommendations for the >> OSPF v3 authentication trailers document. >> >> 1) The v3 authentication trailer takes a step back in the >> ability to rekey securi

RE: [karp] Last Call: (Supporting Authentication Trailer for OSPFv3) to Proposed Standard

Hi, [clipped] > > Based on this review I have a few recommendations for the > OSPF v3 authentication trailers document. > > 1) The v3 authentication trailer takes a step back in the > ability to rekey security associations both from OSPF v2, > from IPsec for OSPF v3 and from [ ..] > > I

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:27:30PM +0700, Glen Zorn wrote: > > advance of the actual event. Agreements about the future almost > > always require the party buying to take some risk that they will be > > paying more than the going rate at the time the actual sale date > > arrives. > > This can

Re: Agenda known in advance? was Re: Experiment for different schedule for Friday

On Aug 23, 2011, at 6:48 AM, IETF Chair wrote: > The important dates page for the meeting > shows a date for > the draft agenda and a date for the final agenda. We try very hard to make > no changes after the final agenda date. Some

RE: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Keith Moore Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 8:37 AM To: Ray Pelletier Cc: John C Klensin; Secretariat IETF; IETF-Discussion list; Lixia Zhang Subject: Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy? $300/night is far too high a ceili

IAOC, travel and hotel prices (was RE: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?)

I've been watching this discussion across several attendee lists, plenaries, etc and it appears that we have a routing loop. Perhaps it's time for those who seem most concerned about this to author a BCP draft regarding IETF meeting venue and hotel selection policies that addresses this, so tha

Re: Experiment for different schedule for Friday

+1 for me as well for either proposed new schedule. On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 2:04 AM, John C Klensin wrote: > +1.  I could also happily live with the alternate, more > compressed, schedule -- I think both are preferable to the > schedule used in Quebec and earlier. > >   john > > > --On Tuesday, A

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

$300/night is far too high a ceiling for a guest room rate. A more reasonable ceiling would be in the ballpark of $150. On Aug 24, 2011, at 8:18 AM, Ray Pelletier wrote: > The points are that the IAOC is not going to select a poor venue because it > may have a > sponsor; nor a $300+ USD guest

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On Aug 23, 2011, at 1:34 AM, John C Klensin wrote: > > > --On Monday, August 22, 2011 20:16 -0400 Ray Pelletier > wrote: > >> ... >> As for the rates, they are high. Taiwan is expensive, >> particularly given that the hotels know what our options are >> when we book the TICC. The Hyatt knew

Re: Last Call: (IPv6Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

inline - Original Message - From: "George, Wesley" To: ; "t.petch" Cc: Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 7:12 PM From: "t.petch" To: Reply-to: daedu...@btconnect.com I find this document utterly bizarre and think it would seriously damage the Internet to publish it. WEG] wel

Re: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

On Aug 24, 2011, at 1:44 AM, Glen Zorn wrote: > Unfortunately, since the meeting fees are tied to the block occupancy > (via conference room charges, etc.), this puts us in a double-bind > situation: the smaller the block, the higher the other fees. This is > the concern that I expressed during t

RE: Hyatt Taipei cancellation policy?

...and, at least in this case, if you look at similar hotels (e.g. the Starwood properties) in the area, you'll find that even the current pre-book-non-refundable-no-breakfast-in-some-cases-no-internet rates will be higher than the rate offered to us. There are also cheaper hotels, so it's a