Dear all,
As an european holding a french passport with my origin coming from Iran i
cannot travel to US with this executive order of Mr Trump even if i work for an
American company.
So i beleive as well that meeting venues should not be any more in US with such
à discriminatory law.
Regards
Mehdi
Sent from my iPhone
On 30 Jan 2017, at 20:58, MH Michael Hammer (5304)
<MHammer(_at_)ag(_dot_)com<mailto:MHammer(_at_)ag(_dot_)com>> wrote:
James,
Seeing as the email you chose to quote was a response to my email from May
27th, 2016, I’m left trying to decide if you were responding specifically to my
comments or that earlier thread in general. I still stand by my statements even
if it means that the ultimate IETF decision is not to hold meetings in the USA
– I think your prognostication unfortunately was correct. I was not being
rhetorical in my earlier comments – We, as participants engaged in technical
efforts across national boundaries need to figure out pragmatic ways of
ensuring our efforts and activities continue to function despite decisions by
specific localities.
Looking forward, it might be reasonable for IETF to include a cancellation
clause based on the government of the host country engaging in an act like the
ban (after the contract has been signed.)
Mike
From: James Seng [mailto:james(_dot_)seng(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com]
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2017 2:08 PM
To: MH Michael Hammer (5304)
Cc: Thompson, Jeff; Dan Harkins;
recentattendees(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org<mailto:recentattendees(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>;
Ietf@Ietf. Org
Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100
I rescind my previous comment that the scenario I painted is rhetorical.
None of our US fellow IETFers here have any moral authority to talk about
"inclusive" ever again.
-James Seng
On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 5:44 AM, James Seng
<james(_dot_)seng(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com<mailto:james(_dot_)seng(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>>
wrote:
Since after 9-11, things have change a lot for United States[1].
Especially for TSA, I remember going to SFO the first time after 9-11, it took
me 2 hours just to clear the security and I missed my flight. I also remember
pre 9-11, I could get into US for less than 15-20mins.
Now, for my American friends who pay in the price in time, let me tell you what
we non-American citizen has to do to get into US after 9-11. We have been
tagged, photographed, fingerprinted, all our 10 fingers every time we have to
enter US. We have been systematically profiled, often by racial or nationality,
and some of us have to go through enhanced body-to-body search everytime we
cross security. I was put in a "Muslim" basket been a Malaysian for a while so
... And we have to do it with a smile because if any of us pull of a stunt like
Aaron Tobey[2], we could be denied our entry and possibility forever.
My wife complains that the over the last decade I have put on a lot of weight
and asked me to check my photos. Unfortunately, I don't like selfie nor do I
like to take pictures of myself. But I told her not to worry as TSA has a
complete profile of me becoming fat over the years.
Today, we all saw a US President may-to-be calling up to forbid Muslim to enter
US, to build walls to prevent people from the south, who threaten to get even
tougher to foreigners.
So by the same principle that Jeff is advocate, that we hold IETF meeting where
"law declares some people less valid", I prognosticate we may no longer able to
hold our meetings in US.
[1]
http://www.ibtimes.com/pulse/united-states-after-911-6-things-have-changed-2001-2093156<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ibtimes.com_pulse_united-2Dstates-2Dafter-2D911-2D6-2Dthings-2Dhave-2Dchanged-2D2001-2D2093156&d=DwMGaQ&c=pqcuzKEN_84c78MOSc5_fw&r=Epy6n6lZ-_AtB6Unawan0zjIdEv95r_5HxuTpDOXS88&m=YG0d5xRrune4H9v4a848Pf_VWTMitYGP8HqzQqCQN5E&s=Yzj0fbZhvJhg19Bg1FPqtgOEC-mi-w-DrzRixinhIvs&e=>
[2]
http://dailylounge.com/the-daily/entry/how-to-fight-the-tsa<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__dailylounge.com_the-2Ddaily_entry_how-2Dto-2Dfight-2Dthe-2Dtsa&d=DwMGaQ&c=pqcuzKEN_84c78MOSc5_fw&r=Epy6n6lZ-_AtB6Unawan0zjIdEv95r_5HxuTpDOXS88&m=YG0d5xRrune4H9v4a848Pf_VWTMitYGP8HqzQqCQN5E&s=g_53wMutlPRDKVPqYeBXsEmlpC-4Myw9QU4812CwH1A&e=>
ps: This is rhetorical to put any doubt in rest. I love US even though getting
there is still a pain for me.
-James Seng
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 9:34 PM, MH Michael Hammer (5304)
<MHammer(_at_)ag(_dot_)com<mailto:MHammer(_at_)ag(_dot_)com>> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org<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<mailto: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<mailto:recentattendees-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
on behalf of
dharkins(_at_)lounge(_dot_)org<mailto: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
_______________________________________________
Recentattendees mailing list
Recentattendees(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org<mailto:Recentattendees(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/recentattendees<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_recentattendees&d=DwMGaQ&c=pqcuzKEN_84c78MOSc5_fw&r=Epy6n6lZ-_AtB6Unawan0zjIdEv95r_5HxuTpDOXS88&m=YG0d5xRrune4H9v4a848Pf_VWTMitYGP8HqzQqCQN5E&s=IbrWLu7DYbdtAsLRNOqj9FIMn8BuytPgAY3QQ-34hu4&e=>
--
-James Seng
--
-James Seng
_______________________________________________
Recentattendees mailing list
Recentattendees(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org<mailto:Recentattendees(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_recentattendees&d=DwICAg&c=pqcuzKEN_84c78MOSc5_fw&r=Epy6n6lZ-_AtB6Unawan0zjIdEv95r_5HxuTpDOXS88&m=YG0d5xRrune4H9v4a848Pf_VWTMitYGP8HqzQqCQN5E&s=IbrWLu7DYbdtAsLRNOqj9FIMn8BuytPgAY3QQ-34hu4&e=