Workshops with restricted attendance often seem to have a two-tiered
policy: authors/panelists first, rest later on a space-available basis.
This unfortunately, for the IETF, has obvious gaming potential which the
I-D editor is not likely to appreciate. Relying on drafts to be
discussed at a WG doesn't work, as that's decided way too late in most
cases. (Any restriction, based on content or anything but cut-off dates,
is likely to cause concerns about openness and equal access, which
presumably NANOG does not have to deal with.)
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
I hate to argue with Randy's common sense but I don't think this
works. There are always people who can't get travel authorisation
until very late, or whatever, among those who are absolutely needed
(i.e. document authors etc.). So we would need rules about who gets in
regardless of the limit, and I don't see any way out of the discussion
that would generate.
Brian
Randy Bush wrote:
as no one has mentioned this approach, i figured to add to the non-
productive confusion as follows:
nanog had an analogous crowding issue. the organizers looked at the problem
and said
the goal is not to become large, the goal is to maintain quality
but one does not want to disenfranchise any particular constituency
so nangog gets space for about 500 people, allows just that many to
register, and it's first register first serve.
randy
-
This message was passed through ietf+censored(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no, which
is a sublist of ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org(_dot_) Not all messages are passed.
Decisions on what to pass are made solely by Harald Alvestrand.