-----Original Message-----
From: ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Thompson,
Jeff
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 3:55 AM
To: Dan Harkins
Cc: recentattendees(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; Ietf@Ietf. Org
Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF
100
On 2016/5/26, 21:11:51, "Recentattendees on behalf of Dan Harkins"
<recentattendees-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org on behalf of
dharkins(_at_)lounge(_dot_)org>
wrote:
I would also like to suggest that the ability of certain members to
bring their family on a vacation that coincides with an IETF should not
be a governing factor in venue selection. Many people like to launder a
business trip into a family vacation (myself
included!) but that's not why the IETF exists and it should have no
bearing on where we meet.
So then, the IETF policy would read ³The IETF may hold meetings in countries
where the law declares some people less valid. If you are such a person, then
the IETF recommends that to avoid trouble with the law you should hide who
you are, including not bringing your family.²
Is this the organization that the IETF is going to be?
- Jeff
Jeff,
Is there any country in the world that meets the standard your comment implies
should be the IETF policy? Is this a case of perfection being the enemy of
good? Perhaps it is a case of perfection being the enemy of reality. I don't
know what IETF policy should be but I do recognize that there are very real
limitations that constrain choices. I'll also point out that the choices made
will constrain the choices of participants. I'm not advocating for any
particular choice by the IETF with regard to meeting locations.
Mike