On 5 Jan 2016, at 13:28, John C Klensin <john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com> wrote:
--On Tuesday, January 05, 2016 09:15 +0000 Stewart Bryant
<stewart(_dot_)bryant(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 04/01/2016 21:33, John C Klensin wrote:
(1) While it is clear that people who favor going back to
Minneapolis are in the minority of the Meetings Committee (at
least as they and the IAOC count votes), it is much less clear
that such people are in the minority of active participants in
the IETF.
Minneapolis is really a metaphor for functional, works well
for most people, easy to get flights and hotels, flight times
not too bad, not regarded as a holiday trip at work, everyone
is there to work.
It does not have to be Minneapolis, but the utilitarian
properties above, are in my view far more relevant than the
IETF World Tour model we seem to have in place.
Agreed. But Minneapolis is, in one way, not just a metaphor.
Especially as we start discussing "go back to the same places
every year" again, Minneapolis was a place we went to multiple
times and found successful (for the reasons you give). Then we
stopped. There has never been an explanation to the community
as to why we stopped
It would be interesting to know. It is, or was, a good meeting venue.
I’m guessing attendance is lower, and meeting fees matter more now?
Tim