Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

[802SEC] FW: [802SEC] Rome decision



Forwarded for obvious reasons ...

Carl
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA) 
> [mailto:matthew.sherman@baesystems.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 9:28 AM
> To: wk3c@wk3c.com
> Subject: RE: [802SEC] Rome decision
> 
> Carl,
> 
> I'm glad you agree with me, but I suspect you wanted to send 
> this to the
> reflector as well as myself...
> :)
> 
> Mat
> 
> Matthew Sherman, Ph.D. 
> Engineering Fellow 
> BAE Systems -  Network Systems (NS) 
> Office: +1 973.633.6344 
> Cell: +1 973.229.9520 
> email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl R. Stevenson [mailto:wk3c@wk3c.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 9:17 AM
> To: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
> Subject: RE: [802SEC] Rome decision
> 
> I agree with Mat.  Many other organizations routinely meet in rotating
> venues to spread the travel cost and burden amongst their 
> attendees and
> to
> encourage broader international participation than they'd get if they
> only
> did NA venues.  They and their attendees find the costs
> managable/acceptable.
> 
> When I can find same hotel (assuming that Pat's link was to 
> the correct
> propery) for an average of $244/night and a lot of 
> $160/night, someone's
> clearly doing something very wrong when our survey says "How about a
> hotel
> rate of $425 (or was it $450?) per night?"  The comparison to 
> Vancouver
> (which is NOT a nNA venue and shouldn't have been used as a comparison
> in
> the first place) at somethnig like $175/night, the results are clearly
> going
> to be skewed ... I'd bet that the results would have been 
> VERY different
> if
> the question had been "Rome at $200/night vs. Vancouver at $175/night
> ...
> though again, Vancouver shouldn't have been an option since it's not a
> nNA
> venue. The question should have been "Rome vs. some other nNA venue"
> with
> REASONABLE, well-negotiated costs for both ... not a "high-ball" on
> Rome.
> 
> I also agree with Mat that we must do nNA venues and that there is NO
> good
> reason not to (as evidenced by the fact that other organizations
> routinely
> do them).
> 
> Finally, I think that Roger's comments about ITU skew the facts a bit
> (though I'm sure he had no mal-intent).  ITU is a special 
> case.  It is a
> quasi-governmental body under the UN and it owns its HQ facilites in
> Geneva
> with sufficient meeting space and all of the built-in translation, IT
> facilities, and support staff for such meetings.  However, as Roger
> admits,
> they do encourage their WPs (some of which are pretty large) 
> to meet in
> non-Geneva venues.  Thus, asserting that "ITU can claim to be
> international
> despite the fact that a majority of its meeting are held in Geneva" is
> not a
> valid claim.  ITU is, by definition, an international 
> organization - it
> doesn't have to "prove" that to anyone.  We, on the other hand, have
> been
> challenged and characterized as being a "US organization" and will
> continue
> to receive that criticism (which might at some point "stick") if we
> don't
> "walk the walk."  (If the IETF started meeting exclusively in the US,
> you
> could be sure that there would be an international clamor 
> that IETF was
> becoming a US-centric/dominated group.)
> 
> Carl
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-stds-802-sec@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 
> > [mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of 
> > Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 7:52 AM
> > To: Rigsbee, Everett O; STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> > Subject: Re: [802SEC] Rome decision
> > 
> > Buzz,
> > 
> > I think in part what I'm recommending is rent the meeting space
> > separate.  If the meeting costs are $1000 a piece, that's fine.  Let
> > people figure out where to stay on their own.  If we make
> > recommendations or provide links to places okay, but if we go 
> > to Europe
> > let's not sign up for room blocks.  If you can find sponsors, 
> > terrific!
> > But I don't think we should decide not to meet outside of 
> > America purely
> > because we don't have a sponsor. 
> > 
> > Mat
> > 
> > Matthew Sherman, Ph.D. 
> > Engineering Fellow 
> > BAE Systems -  Network Systems (NS) 
> > Office: +1 973.633.6344 
> > Cell: +1 973.229.9520 
> > email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
> > 

----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.  This list is maintained by Listserv.