On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com>
wrote:
On Aug 25, 2011, at 12:13 AM, Henk Uijterwaal wrote:
On 24/08/2011 23:12, Keith Moore wrote:
Maybe there needs to be some sort of voting system for future venues.
First of all, remember that the community asked for venue selections
2 to 3 years in advance. I don't think that many people can predict
if they will attend a meeting 2 years from now.
This proposal would require that the secretariat works out 3-4 proposals
for meeting locations in great detail. That is a lot more work than
the current approach:
Really? that is fascinating in itself. I had assume that the current
meeting selection did consider more than one place.
Of course it does. For example, for the last meeting there were a number of
venues considered, most of which were knocked out quickly, say because they
were already booked for "our" week. Eventually, it boiled down to Vancouver
vs QC, which were pretty even in every regard except for the travel
situation. Thus, the survey. That rarely happens if the past 5 years are any
guide.
I think that the meeting selection process is inherently iterative. Pseudo
code might be something like
- Find a list of all venues we can in the target area for the target week.
The number of these is rarely if ever more than 10.
- do an evaluation of venues for availability and suitability
- remove any sites that are not available or are unsuitable.
- rank the remainder for suitability, and do a more thorough evaluation,
focusing more on the higher ranked locations.
- repeat the last 3 steps until convergence, tightening the filters based on
what's learned about the sites
At the end of the process, there may be only be one place left, but it
certainly was not the only one considered.
Until recently, sponsor availability was an important part of venue ranking.
Now, with the 3 year out meeting selection process, that coupling will
largely (but not entirely) go away. Basically, this change IMO increases the
risk of not getting a sponsor, in return for a better choice of available
venues. I suspect it will take a few years before we will see what the
actual cost/benefit ratio is for this change.
Regards
Marshall
_______________________________________________
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