On Sun, 24 May 2009, Dave CROCKER wrote:
What do you think the incremental cost is, for making 1000 senior engineers
people take an additional 8 hours (4 each way) and pay for an additional leg
of travel.
Perhaps I'm wrong, but it's probably more than US$ 40 per person.
When talking about costs and "savings", we really do need to aggregate,
lifecycle estimates, rather than indulge solely in local optimizations.
d/
Right, and "local" is the key word here. We've already agreed that
having IETF in different places is Good for some value of Good and
that some notion of regional rotation is Good. If we picked, say,
London then that might be more optimal for you and me and less so
for the guys in Paris if Paris was an option and so on.
Picking an IETF meeting location is at best a compromise between
competing requirements, available resources and suitable facilities.
Travel considerations do indeed enter into the equation, but are
not the only deciding factor.
Like any engineering product, we can all argue about how well the
compromise worked at the end of the day. Knowing this crowd, I am
sure we'll get all kinds of useful feedback from Stockholm, Hiroshima
and even Maastricht.
Ole
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf