-venue-selection-criteria?
On Nov 18, 2008, at 10:53 AM, Scott Brim wrote:
Excerpts from Randy Bush on Tue, Nov 18, 2008 10:39:57AM -0600:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe our US government would like to grant visas to as many
people as they can. However, if anyone wants to attend a meeting
Let us ask a different question
In what ways can the ietf act to maximize the information available to
the embassy in question to enable them to determine that the
application comes from an active ietf participant?
A letter of invitation to a conference is likely to carry less
- Original Message -
From: Ole Jacobsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 3:34 AM
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for
2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
Dave,
The IAOC
qualified for
2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
On Nov 18, 2008, at 10:53 AM, Scott Brim wrote:
Excerpts from Randy Bush on Tue, Nov 18, 2008 10:39:57AM -0600:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe our US government would like to grant visas to as many
people as they can. However
At 07:04 p.m. 18/11/2008, Nicholas Weaver wrote:
I would bet (but have no evidence) that the visa problem is almost
specifically a chinese issue.
It is NOT a chinese issue. I have got my USA visa, but it IS an issue
to get it.
Fernando Gont (from Argentina)
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: [EMAIL
- Original Message -
From: Dave CROCKER [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 9:03 PM
Subject: Re: [73attendees] IsUSA qualified for
2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
Surely there is enough choice in venue to permit a global organization like
the
IETF
No good can come of this thread.
How about we wait a few months and see what happens after the fourth branch
of government becomes part of the executive branch again on Jan 20th?
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:24 AM, YAO [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
according to IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
How would you solve the problem?
hold the meetings in non-terrorist countries. i.e. not the united states.
randy
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
On Nov 18, 2008, at 10:53 AM, Scott Brim wrote:
Excerpts from Randy Bush on Tue, Nov 18, 2008 10:39:57AM -0600:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe our US government would like to grant visas to as many
people as they can. However, if anyone wants to attend a meeting in
the US is granted a
@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified
for2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
Disclaimer: What I say here are my words and don't represent the views of my
employer.
From what I see here the issues are mostly experienced by Chinese citizens.
Most of the other
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 2:09 PM
To: Yi Zhao
Cc: 'David Quigley'; 'Nicholas Weaver'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified
for2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
Yi Zhao wrote:
Based on my knowledge, for Chinese
Melinda Shore wrote:
Is the issue the visa requirement itself or is it how visas are
processed?
from my pov, the latter. is it easy for folk from all countries to get
to the ietf meetings? for example, that chinese have problems getting
to this meeting is a major and embarrassing disaster.
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Is
USAqualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
I recall stats from IETF 71 (which may be out of date). I
believe at that time, 48% of attendees were from the U.S.
Next was Japan with 9%, then China
: [73attendees] Is
USAqualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
On Nov 18, 2008, at 3:56 PM, Livingood, Jason wrote:
I recall stats from IETF 71 (which may be out of date). I believe at
that time, 48% of attendees were from the U.S. Next was Japan with
9%,
then China
Excerpts from Randy Bush on Tue, Nov 18, 2008 10:39:57AM -0600:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe our US government would like to grant visas to as many
people as they can. However, if anyone wants to attend a meeting in
the US is granted a visa to come here, then I can imagine there will
On Nov 18, 2008, at 00:24, YAO wrote:
It seems that many IETFer are disallowed to enter USA for ietf
meeting when ietf is held in USA this time or other times
Has anyone been denied entry to the USA for IETF 73, without official
explanation, despite their including an IETF invitation with
Disclaimer: What I say here are my words and don't represent the views of my
employer.
From what I see here the issues are mostly experienced by Chinese citizens.
Most of the other countries have reciprocal visa agreements with the US.
China however doesn't have that agreement with Ireland,
Let's also not forget that Mexico is also part of North America. The
percentage of IETF meetings targeted for North America could actually
theoretically be hosted in any of those three countries (USA, Canada,
Mexico) and still benefit from excellent worldwide air travel support.
From: James Seng
On Nov 18, 2008, at 2:27 PM, Soininen Jonne (NSN FI/Espoo) wrote:
I think it would be good for people that were trying to come to the
IETF and couldn't to tell the IAD or me what happened. Accurate data
is very important.
I spoke with colleagues at Tsinghua last night. Apparently some 30
On Nov 18, 2008, at 3:56 PM, Livingood, Jason wrote:
Is the visa issue for visitors from all countries coming to the
U.S., or is this specific to Chinese citizens coming to the U.S.
My understanding, which others should corroborate, is that it relates
to specific countries. China is the
On Nov 18, 2008, at 3:56 PM, Livingood, Jason wrote:
I recall stats from IETF 71 (which may be out of date). I believe at
that time, 48% of attendees were from the U.S. Next was Japan with
9%,
then China with 5.7%. If I recall correctly, this was a good number
of
attendees from China,
That of course goes both ways; going to China is never trivial for me,
and last summer it was a real issue.
I think YMMV.
Over the summer my wife got a Chinese visa in 24 hour turn-around from a
Visa office 190 miles from our home without having to visit.
But then we live in the UK.
Adrian
Fred Baker wrote:
I would be hesitant to drag the IETF into world politics; the law of
Unintended Consequences was invented to describe politics, I think.
It's not a matter of being dragged into politics. (Or at least, it shouldn't
be.)
It's essentially an engineering task of working to
Fred Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The folks to contact are the IAOC. The IETF Chair is on the IAOC.
As to visa issues, as Randy opines, the issue tends to be visa
processing. Depending on country pair, there are interesting issues
around the globe.
You're absolutely right!
This is an
Dave,
The IAOC is aware of the situation with respect to visas for visitors
from mainland China at this particular IETF meeting. Generally
speaking, applicants are NOT refused visas, they just don't get a
reply (or a visa) in time and they may never get a reply at all.
We are not sure what
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008, Dave CROCKER wrote:
It's not a matter of being dragged into politics. (Or at least, it shouldn't
be.)
It's essentially an engineering task of working to maximize the ability of
people to attend IETF meetings, by looking for venues where visa processing is
the least
captured and
documented...
I hope it help.
Thanks
Stephane
-Original Message-
From: David Morris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 12:21 PM
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for
2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria
Ole Jacobsen wrote:
speaking, applicants are NOT refused visas, they just don't get a
reply (or a visa) in time and they may never get a reply at all.
The key point is that there was a pattern of failure to get a visa. To me, the
remaining details are purely secondary.
We are not sure
I think we could easily replay responses from similar threads involving
previous IETFs, and no one would notice.
Let me try to suggest a conclusion that should be generally easy to support:
1. We have problems, severe problems in people's ability to participate
2. The problems vary in place
Stephane H Maes wrote:
I think that if we aim at being an open standard organization, the
highest priority must always be to not disenfranchise any IETF participants.
If you really believe that, it follows that meeting fees (and meeting
expenses in general) need to be drastically reduced.
-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
On 18 nov 2008, at 09.59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe our US government would like to grant visas to as many
people as they can. However, if anyone wants to attend a meeting in
the US is granted a visa to come here, then I can imagine
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 2:25 PM
To: ietf@ietf.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3
ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
according to IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ???
Sent: 18 November 2008 10:15
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ietf@ietf.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for
2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
yes, it's really a problem that IETF meeting
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ???
Sent: 18 November 2008 10:15
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ietf@ietf.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for
2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
yes
On 18 nov 2008, at 09.59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe our US government would like to grant visas to as many
people as they can. However, if anyone wants to attend a meeting in
the US is granted a visa to come here, then I can imagine there will
be 100 million visa applications for the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe our US government would like to grant visas to as many
people as they can. However, if anyone wants to attend a meeting in
the US is granted a visa to come here, then I can imagine there will
be 100 million visa applications for the IETF meeting in CA next
If we could separate the humor from the serious issue here (assuming the
100 million was facetious), it would be interesting to know how many (if
any) spurious applications for visas that an IETF meeting would
generate. If the issue is that the US State Dept. can't sort through a
huge number
yes, it's really a problem that IETF meeting organizers should seriously
consider.
ÔÚÄúµÄÀ´ÐÅÖÐÔø¾Ìáµ½:
From: YAO [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To:
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: [73attendees] Is USA qualified for 2.3 of
draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
Date:Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:24:41
Am 18.11.2008 um 16:59 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I believe our US government would like to grant visas to as many
people as they can. However, if anyone wants to attend a meeting in
the US is granted a visa to come here, then I can imagine there will
be 100 million visa applications for the
On 11/18/08 2:16 PM, Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How would you solve the problem?
hold the meetings in non-terrorist countries. i.e. not the united states.
I don't know what that means. Canada, for example, is a peacekeeper
nation that requires visas for entry from countries from
Hi -
From: Melinda Shore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Scott W Brim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 11:22 AM
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Is USA qualified
for2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria
Randy Bush wrote:
thank you for demonstrating so clearly the jingoistic prejudice at the
us government level that should preclude ietf being held in the united
states.
Folks who have read ietf mailing lists for awhile might have noticed that it's
distinctive when John Klensin and I agree
Two points:
1) As a U.S. citizen, I apologize for the statement made on this thread
by [EMAIL PROTECTED] I quietly suggest to all that it be ignored.
I am he misspoke -- perhaps the laptop slipped in his lap at IETF73.
2) Again as a U.S. citizen, I will contact the IETF Chair and
On 18/11/08 14:27, Soininen Jonne (NSN FI/Espoo) wrote:
Hi everybody,
In the IAOC, we have followed the visa situation for different nations
closely. It is obviously in the benefit for the IETF to have all the
participants that want and need to come to the IETF could also come.
Seems like the
:28 PM
To: ext Joel Jaeggli; Yi Zhao
Cc: 'David Quigley'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Nicholas Weaver';
ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Is USA
qualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
Hi everybody,
In the IAOC, we have followed the visa situation
To: ext Joel Jaeggli; Yi Zhao
Cc: 'David Quigley'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Nicholas Weaver';
ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [73attendees] Is USA
qualifiedfor2.3ofdraft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria?
Hi everybody,
In the IAOC, we have followed the visa situation for
different nations closely
according to IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04#section-2.3
which said
2.3. Freedom of Participation
Meetings should not be held in countries where some attendees could
be disallowed entry or where
entry
issues.
--
Eric
-- -Original Message-
-- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- On Behalf Of Brian E Carpenter
-- Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2006 4:01 AM
-- To: ietf@ietf.org
-- Subject: Re: I-D
-- ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
Joe Abley wrote:
On 20-Jan-2006, at 11:55, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
Well said Barry!
From: Barry Leiba
My biggest concern is in sections 2.3. Freedom of Participation
and 2.5. Attendance Limitation and Visas, in that I'm not sure
how realistic they are. Without getting overly into
While I applaud the sentiment, I believe as written this is an unfortunate
and undesirable constraint.
Something along the lines of:
The IETF should endevour to choose venues where all participants who
choose to can attend the meeting
would seem to capture the goal as a goal.
Yours,
Joel
: Gray, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:16:34 -0500
Para: 'Marshall Eubanks' [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: ietf@ietf.org ietf@ietf.org
Asunto: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-
04.txt
Marshall,
RFCs
, below-in line.
Regards,
Jordi
De: Barry Leiba [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Responder a: ietf@ietf.org ietf@ietf.org
Fecha: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:30:34 -0500
Para: ietf@ietf.org ietf@ietf.org
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: I-D
ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
So
, in-line.
Regards,
Jordi
De: Richard Shockey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:28:38 -0500
Para: IETF list ietf@ietf.org
Asunto: Re: FW: I-D
ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
Hi,
Here
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006, Pekka Savola wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006, Richard Shockey wrote:
This IMHO should have come directly out of the IAOC as the subject matter is
directly within their oversight and charter.
What is the relationship of this document to the IAOC?
I agree that these are
]
-- On Behalf Of Marshall Eubanks
-- Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 9:27 PM
-- To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Cc: ietf@ietf.org
-- Subject: Re: I-D
-- ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
--
-- Speaking just for myself :
--
-- I think that there is a strong benefit to having an agreed
So, could people please review it for errors and omissions?
My biggest concern is in sections 2.3. Freedom of Participation
and 2.5. Attendance Limitation and Visas, in that I'm not sure
how realistic they are. Without getting overly into politics (let's
please not), I think they reflect a
Well said Barry!
Bert
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Barry Leiba
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 17:31
To: ietf@ietf.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I-D
ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
So
It is broken, anyone that has proposed to host an IETF meeting know it. What
you can read in the actual web page about hosting a meeting is not correct
in the reality, and can't be 100% subjective (yes there will be a decision
at the end, and that imply certain degree of subjectivity, but a
On 20-Jan-2006, at 11:55, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
Well said Barry!
From: Barry Leiba
My biggest concern is in sections 2.3. Freedom of Participation
and 2.5. Attendance Limitation and Visas, in that I'm not sure
how realistic they are. Without getting overly into politics (let's
?
Frankly there is'nt much about this document I like. It's a classic
example of the current IETF fashion for process over substance.
Title : IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
Author(s) : J. Palet
Filename : draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
Pages : 18
Date
Well Jordi,
That told you, didn't it?
Richard, do you speak for the Secretariat, for NeuStar, or for yourself?
Adrian
Richard Shockey [EMAIL PROTECTED] might have said...
I'm assuming this is going to be Informational only and as such not
formally binding on the IAOC on the Secretariat.
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006, Richard Shockey wrote:
This IMHO should have come directly out of the IAOC as the subject matter is
directly within their oversight and charter.
What is the relationship of this document to the IAOC?
I agree that these are valid points. Spending cycles on this document
At 2:28 PM -0500 1/19/06, Richard Shockey wrote:
It's a classic example of the current IETF fashion for process over substance.
Fully agree. What is the justification for this becoming an RFC?
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
___
Ietf
From: Paul Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 2:28 PM -0500 1/19/06, Richard Shockey wrote:
It's a classic example of the current IETF fashion for process over
substance.
Fully agree. What is the justification for this becoming an RFC?
Well, backing up slightly ...
How much of our process stuff
propose
specific text. I'm sure everyone will be happy to consider all the inputs.
Title : IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
Author(s) : J. Palet
Filename : draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
Pages : 18
Date : 2006-1-18
This document provides the IAD
Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:43:42 -0800
Para: Richard Shockey [EMAIL PROTECTED], IETF list ietf@ietf.org
Asunto: Re: FW: I-D
ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
At 2:28 PM -0500 1/19/06, Richard Shockey wrote
PROTECTED]
Fecha: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 16:01:32 -0600
Para: IETF list ietf@ietf.org
Asunto: Re: FW: I-D
ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
From: Paul Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 2:28 PM -0500 1/19/06, Richard Shockey wrote:
It's a classic example of the current IETF
: Richard Shockey [EMAIL PROTECTED], IETF list ietf@ietf.org
Asunto: Re: FW: I-D
ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
At 2:28 PM -0500 1/19/06, Richard Shockey wrote:
It's a classic example of the current IETF fashion for process over
substance.
Fully agree. What
Jordi,
Unlike several others and their comments, there are significant
parts of this I find useful, at least in terms of identifying
issues that should be examined. There are several other parts
of it with which I disagree. And, ultimately, the presentation
of a list of suggestions without
,
Jordi
De: John C Klensin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:00:10 -0500
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: ietf@ietf.org ietf@ietf.org
Asunto: Re: I-D
ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
Jordi,
Unlike several others
J
I'm assuming this is going to be Informational only and as such not
formally binding on the IAOC on the Secretariat.
My personal view is that this should be an Informational document, as a
guideline of the selection criteria, as I already tried to describe in the
document.
There should be
: Richard Shockey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:36:21 -0500
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: ietf@ietf.org ietf@ietf.org
Asunto: Re: I-D
ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
J
I'm assuming this is going
John C Klensin wrote:
Jordi,
Unlike several others and their comments, there are significant
parts of this I find useful, at least in terms of identifying
issues that should be examined. There are several other parts
of it with which I disagree. And, ultimately, the presentation
of a list of
--On Friday, 20 January, 2006 04:30 +0100 JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi John,
I understand your points and somehow agree on some of them.
I can try to establish a prioritization if that can help, and
certainly I will be happy to keep updating the document if at
the
ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
Title : IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
Author(s) : J. Palet
Filename : draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt
Pages : 18
Date
FYI
New inputs welcome !
Regards,
Jordi
-- Mensaje reenviado
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:50:02 -0500
Para: i-d-announce@ietf.org
Asunto: I-D ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-03
Hi,
A new version, of the venue-selection-criteria document is available:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection
-criteria-02.txt
Inputs welcome !
Regards,
Jordi
-- Mensaje reenviado
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Responder a: [EMAIL
their laptops, which typically will dissipate 150-200
watts of heat.
Regards,
Jordi
De: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:05:59 -0700
Para: ietf@ietf.org ietf@ietf.org
Conversación: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
a free
dinner too!)? It may or may not make sense to say that if there are
multiple strong candidates (based on information received), a survey of
appropriate selection of them could be useful.
In order to demonstrate the compliance with the IETF meeting venue
selection criteria, all
Would it not be sufficient for the venue to comply with the Americans
with Disabilities Act (regardless of whether it's in the U.S.)?
Eliot
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Hi -
From: Eliot Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ietf@ietf.org; [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 11:04 PM
Subject: Re: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria - accessibility
Would it not be sufficient
the source. This is not
something we need to cover in any kind of RFC, IMO.
John
From: Gray, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/10/24 Mon PM 06:50:09 EEST
To: 'John Loughney' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 'ietf@ietf.org' ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
-- Subject: Re: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria - Other
-- health risks
--
--
-- I believe this to be over specification, I don't think we
-- should cover this.
--
-- From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Date: 2005/10/22 Sat AM 03:16:37 EEST
-- To: ietf@ietf.org ietf@ietf.org
Hi -
From: Gray, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'John Loughney' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 8:50 AM
Subject: RE: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria - Other health risks
...
Also, it is irresponsible for anyone to organize a meeting
I would tend to agree the weather points don't need to be documented.
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
JORDI == JORDI PALET MARTINEZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JORDI I think is clear that we should add some text on this, such
JORDI as: The venue should be well prepared in respect to
JORDI accessibility conditions for the different able.
Please don't use the term differently abled. If
--On 24. oktober 2005 18:27 -0400 Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JORDI == JORDI PALET MARTINEZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JORDI I think is clear that we should add some text on this, such
JORDI as: The venue should be well prepared in respect to
JORDI accessibility
Harald == Harald Tveit Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Harald Needs to be wheelchair accessible is reasonably well
Harald defined, and not too much to ask (I think).
Agreed.
Harald I'm not all that clear on what requirements are clear
Harald enough to make sense for other
@ietf.org
Conversación: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
Asunto: RE: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
How about adding that the mean outdoor temperature at the time of the
year the meeting is being held should be above 0 degrees Centigrade?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Like John said, I think this is overspecifying. And
we really shouldn't be in the business of providing
vaccination recommendations. Check with your doctors
instead. And yes, I'd be willing to travel to places that
may need an additional vaccination. We've probably been
to a place like that
etf.org" <IETF@IETF.ORG> Conversación: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria Asunto: RE: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria Just to respond to the suggestion that Montreal and Toronto could be good destinations ... In theory - Yes. Both venues have a lot to offer. This being said
Some new/reworded text:
A site report for the selected site is important for future planning.
Similarly in the case of failed site decisions, possibly in an anonymous
way such as X, Y, and Z were also considered but had to be postponed or
abandoned due to lack of available space, sponsor
Asunto: Re: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
Brian,
What is the evidence that we will not gain that new
participation without hurting current participation
by primary contributors?
It's very hard to get those data... There is no objective way to
identify 'primary
contributors
-0400
Para: Jeffrey Hutzelman [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: ietf@ietf.org ietf@ietf.org
Conversación: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
Asunto: RE: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
Just to respond to the suggestion that Montreal and Toronto could be
good destinations
+0300
Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: ietf@ietf.org ietf@ietf.org
Asunto: Re: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
Everyone seems to be pointing to the wrong version
of the document. Here's the correct URL:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue
@ietf.org
Asunto: Re: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
Hi,
I think there needs to be some mention of requirements such as:
- MUST NOT be held in a country whose visa requirements are so
stringent as to make it impossible or even extremely difficult for
some participant to attend
I think is clear that we should add some text on this, such as:
The venue should be well prepared in respect to accessibility conditions for
the different able.
Any comments ?
Regards,
Jordi
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org
Barcelona 2005 Global
Selection Criteria
Asunto: RE: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
How about adding that the mean outdoor temperature at the time of the
year the meeting is being held should be above 0 degrees Centigrade?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf
Elwyn raised an interesting point in my opinion:
Even if visas are not required, are there any health checks at immigration ?
Would participants need vaccinations before attending ?
My conclusion is:
It should be considered as a handicap if there is any high risk of health
impact for the
that continental European conventions
are in use for numbers.
What do you mean exactly ?
Regards,
Jordi
De: Elwyn Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:12:55 +0100
Para: ietf@ietf.org ietf@ietf.org
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: IETF Meeting Venue
1 - 100 of 172 matches
Mail list logo
