(Why doesn't your email client display your name by the way?)
I know you asked the question of Ray, but:
Whether or not the security concerns or free-loader concerns
are real or imaginary, I strongly believe that the local organizers
did what they believed to be the norm, the culture and perhaps even
some notion of a "requirement" here, and that this would not cause
any problem for the IETF (which I would claim is largely true)
The issue came to our attention earlier this week (Tuesday?, I think
those carpets in the elevators that tell me what day it is are really
useful, especially by now....) when it was raised by ONE person.
Having multiple Milo Medins is obviously amusing, but I think we've
sort of outgrown that by now (this is my 71st IETF by the way, you
must be pushing 75 -- err, meetings).
As for the apologist stuff, I think you're just hearing from us on
the IAOC that none of us think this is a huge issue, and there seems
to be a fair bit of support for that view, see Scott Bradner's
note for example.
Yes, let's move on.
Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal
Tel: +1 408-527-8972 Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: ole(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010, mstjohns(_at_)comcast(_dot_)net wrote:
Hi Ray -
When did the community decide that this was a prohibited thing? Or
that we were concerned enough with it to post security to make sure
the badge matched the person?
I can think of several IETFs where the badge name did not match the
person including the Stanford IETF where there were a dozen or so
While I appreciate the hotel's and/or host's efforts on our behalf
to secure our belongings, I believe its for us to decide our
attendance policy - not them. And lest you wax poetic about paid
attendees, I will note that the badges were paid for.
Here's what I'm hearing -
The host/hotel/some other organization imposed conditions without
consulting the IAOC. We didn't have much choice. If that's the case
- assign the blame to the host/hotel and move on. We as a community
generally understand re-routing in the face of network/operations
issues. Especially, please avoid the apologist role for the
If the IAOC was consulted and approved this without passing it by
the community, stand up straight and take your lickings and stop
trying to pretend it's what we've always done. It's embarrassing.
If there's a third case I missed please feel free to enlighten me.
Ietf mailing list