On Nov 29, 2007 8:22 PM, Joel Jaeggli <
joelja at bogus.com> wrote:
Pete Resnick wrote:
> India is becoming interesting because (a) we're getting more folks from
> India participating and (b) the mean-time-to-travel to any place on
> earth for current participants might be trending toward India. (We've
> got more folks in east Asia who would have a shorter trip to India than
> to Europe or North America, and there are now direct flights over the
> pole between North America and India.) Finding a large enough venue in
> India is a different problem.
In the past, willing hosts who can make the costs pencil out have
succeeded in in hosting meetings in well connected locations that are a
substantial distance from either the united states or europe.
The collective set of volunteers the secretariat have made hostless
meetings work in locations where they have access to resources.
It doesn't seem to be reasonable or workable for the IAOC to attempt
meeting venues were there are neither hosts with resources (which
variously in the past have included, hands, facilities, circuits,
capital, government contacts etc) or ietf participants who are not hosts
with access to similar resources. The evolution of the hosting model
hasn't thus far (in my experience) eliminated this dependency on the
efforts of hosts and/or resources that members of community have access to.
Every meeting that I have been involved in since 37 located in the US or
outside, perceived to be successful network or otherwise has thus far
leveraged those sorts of resources to a lesser or greater extent.
If we have resources we can leverage in India there's no reason to be
believe that we can't host a successful meeting there. certainly there
are well connected cities with usable venues.
> Personally, on similar mean-time-to-travel grounds, St. Johns in
> Newfoundland looks interesting. :-)
Not, the coldest venue thus far...
> pr
