Point 2 is exactly my point. Places which should have the best
connectivity (tons of international interconnect and PSTN connectivity)
can still be defeated by stupid firewall tricks and no host with
international PSTN conference services.
Conversely, places that North Americans might consider third tier often
have considerably better connectivity than one would expect.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Crocker [mailto:dhc2(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 9:54 AM
To: Burger, Eric
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Meetings in other regions
Let me relate my *EXPERIENCE* with some interim meetings (lemonade).
[I
suppose data is the closest we have to 'working code.'] Meeting held
in
Dallas: 9 participants. Meeting held in Vancouver: 10 participants.
Meeting held in London: 14 participants. Meeting held in Beijing: 21
participants.
Worst Internet connectivity: London.
Best Internet connectivity: tied between Vancouver and Beijing.
Small nit-pick, on trying to generalize from your data:
1. Since we know that The London metropolitan area has excellent
Internet
connectivity and bandwidth, the problems you experienced must have been
due to
the particular meeting site and not the region.
2. For a region that is not obviously able to give excellent service,
the key is
the commitment by local staff (and government) to make sure it is
excellent.
They cannot do anything about the lack of fat pipes to the outside
world, but
they can do quite a bit about fat pipes within the venue and their
reliability.
3. Within the constraints of that basic connectivity to the outside
world, most
major cities are now able to deliver excellent service... given the
commitment
to do so.
d/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf