| Newsgroups |
gmane.ietf.general |
| Message-ID |
<[email protected]> |
Hi Jay,
Some responses below, in-line.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
> El 3 ago 2026, a las 23:53, Jay Daley <[email protected]> escribi=C3=
=B3:
>=20
> Hi Jordi
>=20
> First, let me apologise again for how late this booking was. It should n=
ot have come so late and every effort will be made to ensure that we are no=
t this late again.
It happened the same with Brisbane, which for most of us is probably the mo=
st expensive place to fly.
>=20
> Unfortunately your suggestions grossly underestimate the work required. =
We could not with "a lot of extra workload for a few months" contract 4-5 y=
ears out, not
If we talk about, initially, venues that where we have already been, I don=
=E2=80=99t think that=E2=80=99s so much =E2=80=9Cextra workload=E2=80=9D, c=
learly it was an exaggeration from my side, again, referring to venues were=
we have already been.
> even close. Each venue takes between 12-36 months of negotiations before=
we get to a contract. Many refuse to even open negotiations until we have=
visited
I understand that could be the case for a new venue, that doesn=E2=80=99t n=
othing about us, we also need on-site visits, etc., but not for venues wher=
e we had been already. It doesn=E2=80=99t make any sense. I=E2=80=99ve been=
there, for several years, I=E2=80=99ve organized conferences in hotels and=
convention centers for up to 3.500 people. Also organized exhibitions+conf=
erences in fairgrounds for thousands of people, you can guess than being an=
SME it was much more difficult (basically I was doing everything myself, k=
eeping also with my daily job), but not even close to what I interpret from=
your words.
If a negotiation with a venue takes longer than a few months, we may be doi=
ng something wrong. We maybe asking too much from the venues, or a too low =
price. Clearly something that we need to seriously consider in our venue se=
lection criteria. Because in the end, with the excuse of saving some money =
that it is paid among all of the participants, sponsors, ISOC, etc., we are=
moving the burden of the extra traveling cost to those that are paying fro=
m their own pocket, SMEs, etc., which I don=E2=80=99t think is fair, shorte=
r planing (which probably also impacts in IETF staff traveling costs, etc.)=
. I know it is very difficult to do the proper balance, but I=E2=80=99m con=
vinced it can be done in a better way, and we can work in parallel with sev=
eral years up-front negotiations.
> them in person to prove we are genuinely interested. In the case of Kual=
a Lumpur we went to the community for feedback in May 2023, did the site v=
isit in October 2023 and have been in negotiations since. This is with one=
person working full time on just the negotiation side with three on the me=
eting planning side and assisted by our lawyers. =20
Then maybe the problem is that we are understaffed? We may need to consider=
one additional person for doing so much extra work.
I may be wrong, of course, don=E2=80=99t have the data, but my top of my he=
ad feeling is that for many years (something like 2000-2020), we have been =
more efficient in contracting venues in advance.
I don=E2=80=99t think COVID changed so much the way venues do negotiations.=
For a venue, it is also good to have all set as front as possible. Maybe t=
hey don=E2=80=99t want to do that if we try to fix the price without consid=
ering life cost increase, etc. I think is fair, if we aren=E2=80=99t doing =
so already, to understand and recognize that a venue can=E2=80=99t calculat=
e exact price for an event 5 years from now, but if that=E2=80=99s the prob=
lem, there are ways to define the price for 1-2 years from the contract sig=
nature and agree in an acceptable price increase tied to life cost.
>=20
> As to why we don=E2=80=99t go back to the same venues more often, this is=
generally for three reasons:
>=20
> 1. They are booked. This, for example, is why we have not been back to =
Minneapolis in many years.
Really, all then are booked? Can=E2=80=99t believe that. I can call each of=
them in a matter of minutes and confirm that. I don=E2=80=99 need to say i=
s for an IETF, just find what venues are available in each time slot what w=
e need.
Maybe part of the problem is a decision that I never understood of tying Eu=
rope to summer (with heat waves everywhere), etc. Not defining a so strict =
model up-front, clearly gives us x2 or x3 more chances to match possible ve=
nues.
Again, I=E2=80=99m not saying doing that exception perpetually, but for a f=
ew years until we are set for a few years in advance.
>=20
> 2. They increase their prices considerably. This is why we have not bee=
n back to Singapore as their price rose by ~50%.
I don=E2=80=99t know if that=E2=80=99s acceptable (in principle don=E2=80=
=99t seem so, of course), however it may depend on if most of the venues ar=
e doing that. It probably means we are targeting for too low price consider=
ing overall market, as I suggested already. If that=E2=80=99s the case, we =
are driving ourselves to catastrophic results, increase risk of needed to c=
hange dates, venues that don=E2=80=99t sign the contract in the very last m=
inute, and we don=E2=80=99t have alternatives, etc.
>=20
> 3. Every country prevents entry (either directly or indirectly) to a cert=
ain set of people. If we return to the same country too often then that sa=
me group of people is regularly unable to participate onsite.
Having 3 regions, even if we choose an hypothetical =E2=80=9Cforever=E2=80=
=9D venue in each region, I think there is a quite good balance of people r=
ejected in 1 of the venues, but not in the other 2. Also, we should strive =
to look into other regions, such as Central/South America and Africa, in th=
e longer term.
We aren=E2=80=99t doing this because we love traveling, or we are a tourism=
organzation. We just need venues that work for us to do our job, possibly =
for several years, and we can balance participants that can=E2=80=99t visit=
certain countries.
>=20
> While I understand the difficulties you face when we announce a venue wit=
h less than a year=E2=80=99s notice, at times that cannot be avoided.
As I mention several times, I think it is important to have local people in=
each country helping locally. I know not everyone has the time, knowledge =
or availably for that, but considering IETF is basically volunteer work for=
many of us, probably others can help.
I remain committed to help in the case of Spain.
In fact I did a quick test. I just called the Melia in Madrid, I stated cle=
arly that this is on my own, not speaking for the IETF. I checked if they h=
ave the hotel available with all the meeting space in our dates for summer =
2028, 2029, and 2030. They said yes. There is someone else asking for our d=
ates in 2029, but clearly we have 2 options. I even checked some random non=
-summer dates, and a few of them are also available.
So what are we waiting for fixing that? I you need me involving more time t=
o replace IETF staff time that seems not available, just let me know. I=E2=
=80=99m happy to do it.
>=20
> Jay
>=20
>> On 23 Jul 2026, at 20:55, [email protected] wrote:
>>=20
>> Hi Jay,
>>=20
>> I wanted to raise this point in the plenary yesterday, but I had to leav=
e a bit earlier.
>>=20
>> If I recall correctly, this is the 2nd time in the last few years (Brisb=
ane was the other one), that a venue is announced extremely late.
>>=20
>> May be this is not being realized, but it creates for some participants =
that pay traveling from their own pocket a very high penalty even inability=
to actually make it. Yes, they can still participate remotely, but we all =
know is not the same. On-site conversations, not just the WG meetings are v=
ery important, in addition to the difference of being in the same time zone=
for the meeting itself.
>>=20
>> I=E2=80=99m not sure how many people can/prefers planning ahead, but I=
=E2=80=99m sure others can take advantage of that, and doing so doesn=E2=80=
=99t create any trouble for the rest of the participants. In my own case, t=
he difference is quite significative. If I get my flights 11-12 months in a=
dvance, I can use my miles and just pay 250 euros or so (just taxes) to tra=
vel to KL. An alternative is to pay around 1.000 euros and get upgraded for=
free (because my status in the airline), or using my miles as well. Instea=
d now, as checked yesterday, it will cost me over 5.000 euros for the same =
trip/cabin (seats or upgrades with miles aren=E2=80=99t anymore available).
>>=20
>> I fully understand that many participants are funded by their employers,=
and may be the employers don=E2=80=99t care too much (or not at all) about=
that, but I=E2=80=99m sure I=E2=80=99m not alone with this and it doesn=E2=
=80=99t make any sense that even if is a small set of people being affected=
, not being considerate to them.
>>=20
>> If I understood correctly, from you yesterday in the plenary, now you st=
art working on contracts for meetings after 2027. I really don=E2=80=99t un=
derstand the need to hold that, and instead, considering that our meeting d=
ates are set for at least 6-7 years in advance, work already in all the pos=
sible venues for the next 5 years in advance, contract and announce them at=
least 1-2 years in advance, but *never* later than 1 year in advance.
>>=20
>> This will also give us the advantage, that in case of any venue failure =
(I recall we had that happening at some point in Canada some years ago), we=
have more time to react, possibly even with several options. Just consider=
if for whatever reason KL was not fixed a few days ago and time passes and=
we don=E2=80=99t have suitable alternatives or we need to pay much more fo=
r one of them. I don=E2=80=99t think we can take that risk.
>>=20
>> I understand that doing this now means a lot of extra workload for a few=
months, but after that, when you have already contracted 4-5 years, you on=
ly need to take care of the 6th following year, and so on. I also understan=
d that this may look difficult for new venues because the time required for=
on-site surveys, but there is a simple solution for that: for the next 3-4=
years, just consider venues that we already had used before (we have sever=
al of them in every region, so not a problem).
>>=20
>> In fact, I=E2=80=99ve been very surprised when I=E2=80=99ve asked in the=
last 3 meetings, if we are coming back to Madrid and if is already fixed, =
and the answer was NO, first possible slot is summer 2030. How come, if we =
know the participants were so happy (according to the survey and all conver=
sations we had), we have not even started to talk with the venue again. Why=
we don=E2=80=99t start working with the venue immediately and fix it in a =
few months, even if it is 4 years in advance?
>>=20
>> It doesn=E2=80=99t make any sense to me. I could only imagine, that if y=
ou try to negotiate with the hotel now for 2030 they will give you a higher=
price (I don=E2=80=99t think so, I actually think it will be lower, and yo=
u reduce the risk of not being available on our preferred dates by fixing i=
t now, or even it can be negotiated with a price difference considering lif=
e cost increase, etc.). However, if this is the issue, you are moving the p=
rice difference to the traveling cost of the participants (in additional to=
other planing they may wish to do, such vacations or business side-by-side=
the meeting).
>>=20
>> I used Madrid as a clear example, but of course, the same can be done, a=
t least for the next 4-5 years, with venues that have been very well rated,=
as I think it was Berlin, BKK, Singapore, etc., and that may keep offering=
sufficiently good conditions for IETF.
>>=20
>> Regards,
>> Jordi
>>=20
>> @jordipalet
>>=20
>>> El 21 jul 2026, a las 15:07, IETF Executive Director <exec-director@iet=
f.org> escribi=C3=B3:
>>>=20
>>> The IETF Administration LLC is pleased to announce Kuala Lumpur as the =
location for the IETF 128 meeting, scheduled for 6-12 March 2027.
>>>=20
>>> The support and commitment of our Global Hosts and meeting sponsors ens=
ures that IETF participants can meet and collaborate in the highly producti=
ve environment of an onsite meeting. To find out more about these opportuni=
ties to support the IETF, please see:
>>>=20
>>> https://www.ietf.org/support-us/sponsorship/
>>>=20
>>> I look forward to seeing many of you there.
>>>=20
>>> --=20
>>> Jay Daley
>>> IETF Executive Director
>>> [email protected]
>>>=20
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IETF-Announce mailing list -- [email protected]
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>=20
>>=20
>> **********************************************
>> IPv4 is over
>> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
>> http://www.theipv6company.com
>> The IPv6 Company
>>=20
>> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or =
confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of th=
e individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosur=
e, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even i=
f partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be c=
onsidered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be awar=
e that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this=
information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly proh=
ibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the ori=
ginal sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>=20
> --=20
> Jay Daley
> [email protected]
> www.ietf.org
>=20
>=20
>=20
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or con=
fidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the i=
ndividual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, =
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if p=
artially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be cons=
idered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware t=
hat any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this in=
formation, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibi=
ted, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the origin=
al sender to inform about this communication and delete it.