> From: Bob Hinden <bob(_dot_)hinden(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
> I do note that it seems clear that registration is related to where
> we meet. That show up pretty clearly the current data. So judging
> where to have future meetings based on past participation will tend
> to keep us where we used to meet.
> ...
> I think an important part of the meeting rotation is to equalize the
> travel cost/pain for most attendees.
The last makes some sense, but I wonder about the 'local attendees'
affect. Clearly you will always get a goodly number of people from the
location where the meeting is, but how far does the 'continental' effect
reach in that breakdown?
E.g. for a North American meeting on the West Coast, how many North
Americans are coming from the East Coast? For the Far East, how many are
coming from other countries in the Far East?
To put it another way, do we have a substantial pool of people who will
travel a long ways for a meeting in their home continent, but not to other
continents? I think that's the group (and its breakdown by continent) we
really need to look for/at. _If_ that's heavily skewed to one continent,
we might want to bias the meeting schedule in their favour.
(The people who will always come, no matter where it is, aren't as much of
an issue, although all else being equal, as you point out it would be good
to equalize their pain. As for the local-only attendees, well, no matter
where you go, you only get them from close by, and we can't visit all
plausible cities on any sort of schedule, so I'm not sure how much weight
we want to put on letting one-time attendees get a taste of the IETF.)
Noel
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf