ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Request for community guidance on issue concerning a future meeting of the IETF

2009-09-21 10:02:17

On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Eric Rescorla wrote:

I'm not really following you here. I've read the stated contract
terms and I'm concerned that they prohibit activities which may
reasonably occur during IETF. Are you saying:

(a) No, they don't prohibit those activities.
(b) Yes, they do prohibit those activities, but they won't actually
    be enforced that way.

If you're saying (a), I'd be interested in seeing your analysis of 
why that is the case, since my own analysis indicates the contrary. 
Indeed, it seems to me that this very discussion we are having now 
(which clearly is an appropriate IETF discussion), violates a number 
of the terms.

What I am saying is (c) that you have listed a set of topics and 
concluded that they violate the contract, I don't agree. I have stated 
what I believe to be the INTENTION of the language in the contract, 
namely prevent political protest at the meeting. I have now attended 
68 out of 75 IETF meetings, but I have never seen "political protest" 
of the form that I think might lead to a meeting being shut down in 
China. Yes, we are a rowdy bunch at times, and we discuss a lot of 
technical things that spill over into layer 9, but let me repeat what 
I said earlier: There is no way the host, with the understanding of 
the government, would invite us to meet in China if they expected us 
to:

a) Not discuss our usual topics
b) Stage a political rally

The offending hotel clause, simply put, is a reminder of b.


I'm a little puzzled by "stay home". It's not like the world
is divided into "China" and "Home". In what way are Hiroshima,
Anaheim, and Maastricht, to pick three random examples any more 
"Home" than China?

I thought this was clear, but: Staying home for any value of home
would mean not attending a meeting in China if it were held there,
or more generally not holding the meeting there. There are already
some people who have said they would "stay" home if we held a meeting 
there, based on principle or based on what I will characterize as 
"fear of consequences".

My personal belief, and the belief of many of have attended meetings
in China is that the fear is unfounded.


Ole
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>