Re: A couple of meta points -- IETF 100, Singapore, onwards

Ole Jacobsen <olejacobsen(_at_)me(_dot_)com> wrote:
    > Yet we seem to do that all the time so let me ask you this:

    > Suppose we could predict# that some number of attendees from China
    > would be denied* entry into the US or Canada or Argentina at an
    > upcoming meeting. Should we conclude that holding the meeting in those
    > locations is unacceptable and seek a relocation?

I believe that we should conclude that, and that we ought to seek a
relocation as well.  It would have been nice if this had somehow gone up to
the US Senate along with the IANA Transition stuff this week.

    > * By "denied" I mean no response received about visa application, visa
    > denied, visa approved months after meeting took place, etc.  In one
    > IETF meeting, 77 people from China applied for letters of invitation
    > and visas, 27 were able to receive the visas in time to attend.

I note that it included one IAB member who was not returned for a second term.
Would the nomcom have made a different decision had an in-person interview
been possible?  I don't know.


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF(_at_)sandelman(_dot_)ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature