RE: Orlando meeting?

["Spencer Dawkins" <Spencer.Dawkins.sdawkins at nt.com>]

To give one answer to Pete's original question, my understanding is that
the problem IETF has encountered most recently hasn't been "too many
onlookers stopping by to justify a vacation in disney world", it was
"too many onlookers stopping by because it was on the way to work".
Isn't silicon valley the only "we'll NEVER go there again" IETF venue?

I note we ARE going back to LA, and I'm assuming that the Houston hotel
disasters I've heard about could be avoided somehow if we ever venture
into that corner of Texas again.

My impression is that the IETF meeting schedules are too arduous for
someone who is sitting through the meetings to go out and do the tourist
thing afterwards (after WHAT? The evening sessions? The PGP party? The
FedEx hub tour? Give me a break); if people tell their bosses "I'm going
to IETF" and sit on the beach all day, that's their loss and our gain.
If there really are lots of engineers who would subject themselves to an
IETF meeting so the spouse and kids can go hug Mickey, I'm a little
surprised. 

(I wouldn't even READ THIS LIST if I was on vacation - especially with
the postings from the last week - but that's another story!)

Spencer Dawkins, Nortel

>----------
>From: 	Pete Resnick[SMTP:presnick at QUALCOMM.COM]
>Sent: 	Monday, February 16, 1998 5:57 PM
>To: 	ietf
>Cc: 	Uri Blumenthal; Rik Drummond; Dave Crocker; Andrew M. Benhase
>Subject: 	RE: Orlando meeting?
>
>On 2/16/98 at 5:44 PM -0600, Andrew M. Benhase wrote:
>
>>There seems to be growing support for the idea of having the meeting in
>>Orlando? ;-0
>
>There seems to be growing support for the idea of Orlando having a
>reasonable airport. Is there anyone else out there who has an opinion (pro
>or con) on the advisability of having the meeting at an attractive tourist
>site? (That was my original question.)
>
>pr
>--
>Pete Resnick <mailto:presnick at qualcomm.com>
>QUALCOMM Incorporated
>Work: (217)337-6377 or (619)651-4478 / Fax: (217)337-1980
>
>