Re: Requirement to go to meetings

For me, the plan outlined below changes the cost of the travel from:
        Long @ $2,000, Medium @ $1,200, and Short @ $400 = $3,600
to:
        Short @ $400, Short @ $400, Medium @ $1,200 = $2,000

HOWEVER, if I lived in Asia, the plan proposed below changes my costs from 
$3,600 to
        Long @ $2,000, Long @ $2,000, Medium @ $1,200 = $5,200

So, instead of someone in the U.S. paying $3,600, or about 7.5% the per-capita 
GDP, they can pay $2,000, or about 4% of per-capita GDP, for a reduction of 
travel costs of about 45%.  Along with that dramatic savings, there is a 
corresponding shifting of the travel burden.  Instead of someone in China 
paying $3,600, or about 84% of the per-capita GDP, they can pay $5,200, or 
about 122% of per-capita GDP, for an increase of almost 50%.  Even better, that 
individual most likely will have trouble getting a visa.

So, not only will we succeed in ensuring a drop-off in participation by 
unsponsored individuals, this would be a wonderful plan to reduce participation 
in the IETF by people outside of North America.

[Last I looked, reducing participation was NOT a goal of the IETF.]

On Oct 23, 2011, at 1:12 PM, Ping Pan wrote:

> In the past three IETF meetings, I have traveled to Beijing, Prague and 
> Quebec City to meet most who live within a few hours (air, car, walking etc.) 
> from me. The next two will be in Taipei (in Winter) and Paris (in Spring). 
> This is more like a vacation package than a get-together for engineers to 
> solve problems face-to-face.
>
> Several of us have chatted about this last week. How about this as a 
> recommendation?
>
> We have two meetings in fixed locations each year: Minneapolis in winter, and 
> Phoenix in summer. The other one can be somewhere in Europe or Asia.
>
> Both Minneapolis and Phoenix have huge conference facilities, are easy to go 
> to, and can get cheap off-season discount. Most of all, it encourages the 
> participants who want to do work going there.
>
> Make sense?
>
> Ping
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Eric Burger 
> <eburger(_at_)standardstrack(_dot_)com> wrote:
> It gets worse.  To attend every IETF meeting costs about $10,000 per year.  
> If we say one has to go to the face-to-face meetings, we limit the IETF to 
> participants from corporations or entities that will sponsor the individual 
> (pay to play?), IETF participants that have independent funds, or people that 
> can generate significantly more than $10,000 per year from their IETF 
> activities.  $10,000 per year is not within a typical individual's budget.  
> This is more especially so if the individual comes from a region of the world 
> where the per-capita GDP is below $10,000 per year.
>
> Where does the $10,000 figure come from? It is based on the following 
> assumptions:
> One trip is far, so $2,000 for airfare
> One trip is near, so $400 for airfare
> One trip is in between, so $1,200 for airfare
>
> Hotel: 6 nights (Sunday - Friday) at $200 average per night (including tax).
> I know, Taipei is much more than that and Vancouver, including tax, will be 
> exactly that. However, the numbers are nice and round at $200. I often cannot 
> afford to stay at the conference hotel; use your own numbers for your own 
> circumstances.
>
> Meals & Misc Expenses: $50/day for 6 days
>
> So, the calculation is:
> 3x ($650 registration fee + $1,200 average airfare + $1,200 average hotel 
> cost + $300 meals/other) = $10,050
>
>
> It is critically important to note the cost is dominated by travel and hotel. 
> The only parameter in IETF's control is the registration fee. Even if ISOC, 
> sponsors, or someone else endowed the IETF so we could drop the registration 
> fee to zero, the annual cost for travel is over $8,000, which is still rather 
> expensive.
>
> I do not believe we consciously want to prohibit individuals from 
> participating in the IETF. I do not believe we consciously want to prohibit 
> individuals from outside North America, Europe, and select (wealthy) Asian 
> countries. However, this is one logical result of mandating people go to the 
> face-to-face to get work done.
>
>
> On Oct 23, 2011, at 6:26 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>
> > On 10/21/2011 7:58 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
> > > It's increasingly the case that if you
> > > want to do work at the IETF, you need to go to meetings. I'd have
> > > considerable reservations about asking for the kind of money you're
> > > suggesting.
> >
> > Melinda,
> >
> > I've changed the subject line because the point you raise is orthogonal to 
> > the main thread, but since you raise it, it's worth exploring a bit (since 
> > I happen to agree with your observation.)
> >
> > The dynamics that make this true seem to have to do with changes in our 
> > community rather than in the nature of the technical work or the online 
> > tools.
> >
> > So the question is how to move the center of gravity back to mailing lists?
> >
> > d/
> >
> > --
> >
> >  Dave Crocker
> >  Brandenburg InternetWorking
> >  bbiw.net
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

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