On 4/7/2016 3:56 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
The two cases may be hard to distinguish from a distance, but
they are very different.
I'm going to suggest that, in practical terms for the IETF, it doesn't
matter.
It doesn't matter because none of the theory or formal issues can be
reliably and accurately applied for issues of social concern.
What matters is whatever the community decides it cares about at the
time we are looking at the area.
Here's my logic:
While some regions -- especially Asia -- have been challenging for
finding venues, we already have an extensive track-record of finding
places the community deems acceptable. Consequently, we have safe
harbors to fall back on, for each of the 3 regions we regularly visit.
So when a new country or city is being considered -- and by new, I
think I mean 'we have never been there', but perhaps we need to leave
room for reconsideration of previously-visited places? -- we float the
general countries and maybe cities to the community and wait for support
and objections.
Whatever criteria the community chooses to apply at that time are the
relevant criteria. No theory or modeling or documentation or even
consistency -- and especially no guessing and no errors by an anointed
body -- are required.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net