Re: IETF58 - Network Status

I already indicated before: 100-150 Euros more is not a big issue.


I strongly and emphatically disagree, and I strongly object to attempts to
use of increased meeting feeds to discourage some parties from participating
at IETF.  Basically this kind of fee increase is completely and absolutely
unacceptable.

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: IETF58 - Network Status, (continued) Re: IETF58 - Network Status, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ RE: IETF58 - Network Status, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Keith Moore Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Bob Hinden Re: IETF58 - Network Status, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Roland Bless Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Ole J. Jacobsen Re: IETF58 - Network Status, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Scott W Brim Re: IETF58 - Network Status, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Keith Moore <= Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Iljitsch van Beijnum Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Steven M. Bellovin Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Iljitsch van Beijnum Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Joel Jaeggli Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Eliot Lear Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Daniel Senie Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Iljitsch van Beijnum Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Chirayu Patel Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Dean Anderson Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Randall Gellens

Previous by Date:	Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Keith Moore
Next by Date:	Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Iljitsch van Beijnum
Previous by Thread:	Re: IETF58 - Network Status, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Next by Thread:	Re: IETF58 - Network Status, Iljitsch van Beijnum
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]