I don't see why the model has to add up to a multiple of 3 -- we have an
essentially unlimited number of future meetings to schedule, and should be able
handle a grouping that doesn't necessarily end on a year boundary each time.
My problem with 3-2-1 is that I am not sure whether the "1" should be Europe or
Asia, since the number of participants seems to be relatively similar from
each. It does occur to me that North America still seems to have more active
"repeat offenders" than the other continents.
This leads me to wonder about a 3-2-2 model.
Ross
PS: I have also wondered why July seems to usually land us in Europe, and I am
quite looking forward to next July in Quebec City (pretty much all of Canada
being nice that time of year).
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Yoav Nir
Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 5:47 AM
To: IETF discussion list
Subject: Re: IETF Attendance by continent
I'm more in favor the 3-2-1 model. The stats clearly show that the largest
group of "repeat offenders" comes from the US.
But either way, I also agree that Europe is the summer is not ideal. in the US
there's much less of the "vacances" phenomenon.
So how about:
- March in Europe
- July in N America
- November either in Asia or some other place (Africa, S America) or maybe
sometimes in N America, depending on which model we pick.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf