US by itself was about half, and Canada was about another 10%. The
current split of 2/3 in North America and alternating Europe and Asia
once a year still seems to make sense from the stats.
Tony Hansen
Fred Baker wrote:
That said, I'll remind you of the demographics of this particular
meeting, working from memory from the slide Brian showed Wednesday
evening. It looked to me like this meeting was a tad less than half from
North America, perhaps 20% from Japan and China, and most of the rest
from Europe. That argues for roughly half of our meetings being in North
America, a meeting every other year in Asia, and the rest in Europe.
On Jul 14, 2006, at 10:14 AM, Scott W Brim wrote:
On 07/14/2006 10:01 AM, Fred Baker allegedly wrote:
Once upon a time, the guideline I followed was that about 1/6 of
the IETF was from Europe, a smattering was from elsewhere, and
the lion's share was from the US, so I scheduled a meeting every
other year in Europe, the odd one in random places, and the
lion's share in the US. Those statistics are essentially
meaningless now.
Why are they meaningless? The IETF should overwhelmingly meet where
the participants are, wherever that might be. I still like your
algorithm.
http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/06jul/slides/plenaryw-0.pdf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf