Re: IETF 78 Announcement

[Jari Arkko <jari.arkko at piuha.net>]

I'm sure the meeting could at least in theory have been organized in a 
place with better connections. Whether that would have been possible in 
practice is another matter. From my perspective the grounds for the 
decision -- as indicated here by the IAOC folk -- seemed reasonable.

For some perspective, here are the door to door travel times for some of 
my recent and upcoming IETF and IESG trips:

Maastricht: 7 hours (using 2.5h train route provided by ns.nl and 
similar times to get to/from train as I did with Amsterdam recently)
Stockholm: 3.5 hours
Amsterdam (IESG retreat): 5 hours (you have to take a train to city center)
San Francisco: 20 hours
Minneapolis: 22 hours (2 stops; delay and lost flight in ORD)
Dublin: 9 hours (there was no suitable direct flight and then the 
traffic on site was pretty bad)
New York (IESG retreat): 12 hours
Philadelphia: 16 hours (via NYC and then by car; excluding the time 
spent resting in a NYC hotel and the time spent skiing on the way to 
Philly :-)
Vancouver: 18 hours
Prague: 7.5 hours (no direct flight, but Internet worked well at MUC)
San Diego: 23 hours (I think; I had no record left)

As you can see, Maastricht is not too bad compared to the others. 
Clearly, other things being equal Amsterdam would have been easier to 
get to. But Maastricht would still fare better than Dublin or Prague did 
for me. Stockholm will be a very short trip. Unless I join the folk who 
go there by sailing :-)

Also, note that Schiphol is a major airline hub. You'll far more likely 
to find a direct flight there from where you live (cf. to Prague, 
Stockholm, San Diego, Philadelphia, etc). You do need a second leg in 
your journey and this time its going to be on a train, not on an airplane.

Jari