y Bush
Cc: IETF Disgust
Subject: Re: Time in the Air
--! 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 E
Lloyd Wood
> quiet time on a plane can be productive time.
Economy class or something better?
--
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow
On 31 May 2013 20:56, Carlos M. Martinez wrote:
> You are right, Wellington is almost 7 degrees south of Montevideo,
> although I hope it's better served by airlines :D
>
also nearer the equator than most of Europe; a geographical fact of life
that has been conveniently ignored in the discussion
On Jun 2, 2013, at 10:38 AM, l.w...@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
> "Always Europe gets better results because it is the favoriate
> meeting-location for ALL
> businesses"
>
> {{citation needed}}
Here you go:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edsel_Citation
(idea taken from http://what-if.xkcd.com/47/ - is
am
Baryun [abdussalambar...@gmail.com]
Sent: 01 June 2013 11:18
To: Mark Nottingham
Cc: ietf Discussion
Subject: Re: Time in the Air
Thanks Mark,
This is very interesting results, it is ok if not 100% correct which I
think the error can be less than 10%, but I may have different
analysis of results. You
Thanks Mark,
This is very interesting results, it is ok if not 100% correct which I
think the error can be less than 10%, but I may have different
analysis of results. You concluded that homes in Europe had better
shortest distances to IETF meetings (assuming that thoes homes have
full participati
On May 31, 2013, at 8:49 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
> i too, but tokyo. induce. answer, remote participation. i hope that a
> decade from now many of us will not need to fly.
We could just always meet in Tokyo. I'd be down with that...
:)
On May 31, 2013, at 4:32 PM, Elwyn Davies
mailto:elw...@dial.pipex.com>> wrote:
Don't they use the ADs (Area Drones) controlled from the IESG bunker?
Nope, ADs are autonomous.
> Heavens no. All meetings should be in Santa Barbara, so I don't have
> to board an airplane at all.
i too, but tokyo. induce. answer, remote participation. i hope that a
decade from now many of us will not need to fly.
randy
On May 31, 2013, at 7:03 AM, l.w...@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
> clearly, all IETF meetings should be in Cape Town, Wellington, or Perth,
> because more time in the air means more time without interruption where
> drafts can be read before the meeting.
Heavens no. All meetings should be
... and now, looking forward to our announced upcoming meeting locations (just
the shortest route numbers, not great circle):
LHR 145:30 // London
JFK 150:20 // New York
SFO 155:54 // San Francisco
FRA 156:08 // Frankfurt
ATL 158:10 // Atlanta
BOS 159:34 // Boston
ANC 181:56 // Anch
On 31/05/2013, at 7:59 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> SFO 204:10 282:04 // San Francisco
> BOS 197:42 297:38 // Boston
> ATL 205:44 297:28 // Atlanta
> ANC 197:12 345:54 // Anchorage
> LHR 198:02 249:44 // London
> FRA 202:10 255:22 // Frankfurt
> FCO 223:52 283:04 // Rome
> S
On 31/05/13 20:18, Scott Brim wrote:
On Friday, May 31, 2013, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 5/31/2013 8:12 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
We'll have multiple airships, one for each set of related
meeting rooms.
is dirigible a new term of endearment for an AD?
Obviously the ADs have
You are right, Wellington is almost 7 degrees south of Montevideo,
although I hope it's better served by airlines :D
cheers!
~C.
On 5/31/13 3:24 PM, Jorge Amodio wrote:
>
>> Completely off-topic too, but since I live in the southernmost capital
>> city of the world, and certainly not the best s
On 5/31/13 12:18 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
On Friday, May 31, 2013, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 5/31/2013 8:12 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
We'll have multiple airships, one for each set of related
meeting rooms.
is dirigible a new term of endearment for an AD?
Obviously the ADs ha
On Friday, May 31, 2013, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 5/31/2013 8:12 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
>
>> We'll have multiple airships, one for each set of related meeting rooms.
>>
>
>
> is dirigible a new term of endearment for an AD?
>
Obviously the ADs have a small helicopter so they can get between
dirigi
On 5/31/2013 8:12 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
We'll have multiple airships, one for each set of related meeting rooms.
is dirigible a new term of endearment for an AD?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
ote:
>
> On May 31, 2013, at 10:03 AM, wrote:
>
>> clearly, all IETF meetings should be in Cape Town, Wellington, or Perth,
>> because more time in the air means more time without interruption where
>> drafts can be read before the meeting.
>>
>> quiet time
> Completely off-topic too, but since I live in the southernmost capital
> city of the world, and certainly not the best served by airlines
When you moved to NZ ? ;-)
-J
If people are interested, we could launch a new service: dirigible tours
with Internet access. We'll have multiple airships, one for each set of
related meeting rooms. Of course we'll have audio, jabber and all the
virtualization tools we have today. We'll amble along at some moderate
speed, doc
On May 31, 2013, at 10:03 AM, wrote:
> clearly, all IETF meetings should be in Cape Town, Wellington, or Perth,
> because more time in the air means more time without interruption where
> drafts can be read before the meeting.
>
> quiet time on a plane can be productive ti
On May 31, 2013, at 10:18 AM, Riccardo Bernardini wrote:
> Then I would suggest Antarctica as permanent location for future IETF
> meetings. :-) Maybe the only drawback is hotel availability, but
> nothing that a handful of tents and sleeping bags cannot cure...
> Also, penguins are cute :-)
Thi
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:03 PM, wrote:
> clearly, all IETF meetings should be in Cape Town, Wellington, or Perth,
> because more time in the air means more time without interruption where
> drafts can be read before the meeting.
>
> quiet time on a plane can be productive time
clearly, all IETF meetings should be in Cape Town, Wellington, or Perth,
because more time in the air means more time without interruption where drafts
can be read before the meeting.
quiet time on a plane can be productive time.
Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> Of course, this doesn't include time-to-airport, so you can immediately
> discount London.
>
Well, you say that, but I now know why Alexey moved from Moscow to Kingston
(40 minutes to LHR on the X26).
Dave.
Wow, that's real science at work...
Sorting by the relevant column (I don't own a private jet):
> LHR 249:44 // London
> FRA 255:22 // Frankfurt
> SFO 282:04 // San Francisco
> FCO 283:04 // Rome
> SVO 287:14 // Moscow
> ATL 297:28 // Atlanta
> BOS 297:38 // Boston
> NRT 314:38 //
On 31/05/2013, at 8:28 PM, Fernando Gont wrote:
> On 05/31/2013 11:59 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> In an attempt to inject some data into the discussion, I wrote a bit
>> of code that figures out how much time, given your home city, you
>> would have spent in the air if you'd attended all IETF
On 05/31/2013 11:59 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> In an attempt to inject some data into the discussion, I wrote a bit
> of code that figures out how much time, given your home city, you
> would have spent in the air if you'd attended all IETF meetings since
> IETF74 (i.e., from 2009 onwards).
>
>
In an attempt to inject some data into the discussion, I wrote a bit of code
that figures out how much time, given your home city, you would have spent in
the air if you'd attended all IETF meetings since IETF74 (i.e., from 2009
onwards).
The first column is the "home" airport.
The second colu
29 matches
Mail list logo
