Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities



On 12/04/2017 15:30, Michael Richardson wrote:

Right, so this is why it's better for everyone to be remote.

Except that the IETF funding model requires attendees to pay theirmeeting fee.


- Stewart

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, (continued) Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Rich Kulawiec Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Stewart Bryant Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Carsten Bormann Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Rich Kulawiec Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Carsten Bormann Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Dave Crocker Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, John Leslie Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Michael Richardson Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Loa Andersson Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Michael Richardson Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Stewart Bryant <= Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Joel M. Halpern Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Christian Hopps Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Michael Richardson Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities, Toerless Eckert Structure of IETF meeting weeks (was: Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities), Stephen Farrell Re: Structure of IETF meeting weeks, Brian E Carpenter Re: Structure of IETF meeting weeks, Stephen Farrell Re: Structure of IETF meeting weeks (was: Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities), Bob Hinden Re: Structure of IETF meeting weeks (was: Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities), Toerless Eckert RE: Structure of IETF meeting weeks (was: Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities), Tobias Gondrom