There is a new I-D trying to fix what we require for the meetings .... Is
still preliminary and I will like to have an informal meeting with the
interested people which may have some expertise on this topic in Paris. So
if you're interested let me know !
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection
-criteria-00.txt
My experience setting up meetings and conferences shows that most of the
time, unless you don't fix the venue ahead 18 months or even more, the
chances to have a good venue and price are reduced very quickly (I mean less
choices, worst price and conditions in general).
So, I will say that is extremely important to plan as much ahead as
possible, and if it can be done even 2 years up-front, much better than just
18 months. Is not only a question of who is attending, but also who is
organizing and hosting.
Regards,
Jordi
De: Dave Crocker <dhc2(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net>
Organización: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Responder a: <dcrocker(_at_)bbiw(_dot_)net>
Fecha: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 07:09:16 -0700
Para: John C Klensin <john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com>
CC: <iad(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>, "ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org"
<ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Asunto: Re: Meeting Locations
Is it reasonable for us to hope that, as things settle down over
time, we can reasonably expect to get to the "meeting times and
locations known 18 months to two years out" status that has been
the target for some years? Or, to put it differently, without
any unreasonable expectations about how quickly it is possible
to get back onto that basis, is it still the target and do you
consider that target plausible?
"back" onto that basis?
As a matter of practise, there has never been any attempt to schedule venues
18-24 months out. Instead, there has been a reliance on finding meeting
hosts. This has ensured that early venue selection was not possible.
(Some folks might remember that roughly 10 years ago, Marshall and I proposed
scheme that would have chosen a standard site if no host is selected by the
cutoff.)
As noted in the current thread, early site selection permits attendee
budgeting. From the IETF side, it permits serious negotiating for site terms
and operational efficiencies when a previous site is re-used. Minneapolis has
been a useful demonstration of this latter point, I think.
By placing a priority on having hosts and/or on selecting venues to encourage
local Internet development, we place meeting operational and cost benefits as
secondary priorities.
--
d/
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
+1.408.246.8253
dcrocker a t ...
WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org
Barcelona 2005 Global IPv6 Summit
Information available at:
http://www.ipv6-es.com
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf