idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-02.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (October 31, 2016) is 2706 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Best Current Practice ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Missing Reference: 'Important' is mentioned on line 285, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'Mandatory' is mentioned on line 672, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'Desired' is mentioned on line 383, but not defined == Unused Reference: 'I-D.barnes-healthy-food' is defined on line 750, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Outdated reference: A later version (-02) exists of draft-krishnan-ietf-meeting-policy-01 -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'MeetingNet' ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4071 (Obsoleted by RFC 8711) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4371 (Obsoleted by RFC 8714) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 7691 (Obsoleted by RFC 8711) Summary: 3 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 6 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 mtgvenue R. Pelletier 3 Internet-Draft Internet Society 4 Intended status: Best Current Practice L. Nugent 5 Expires: May 4, 2017 Association Management Solutions 6 D. Crocker, Ed. 7 Brandenburg InternetWorking 8 L. Berger 9 LabN Consulting, L.L.C. 10 O. Jacobsen 11 The Internet Protocol Journal 12 J. Martin 13 INOC 14 F. Baker, Ed. 15 October 31, 2016 17 IETF Plenary Meeting Venue Selection Process 18 draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-02 20 Abstract 22 This documents the IETF's Meeting Venue Selection Process from the 23 perspective of its goals, criteria and thought processes. It points 24 to additional process documents on the IAOC Web Site that go into 25 further detail and are subject to change with experience. 27 Status of This Memo 29 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 30 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 32 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 33 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 34 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 35 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 37 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 38 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 39 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 40 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 42 This Internet-Draft will expire on May 4, 2017. 44 Copyright Notice 46 Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 47 document authors. All rights reserved. 49 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 50 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 51 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 52 publication of this document. Please review these documents 53 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 54 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 55 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 56 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 57 described in the Simplified BSD License. 59 Table of Contents 61 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 62 1.1. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 63 1.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 64 2. Venue Selection Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 65 2.1. Core Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 66 2.2. Venue Selection Non-Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 67 3. Venue Selection Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 68 3.1. Venue City Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 69 3.2. Basic Venue Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 70 3.3. Technical Services and Operations Criteria . . . . . . . 7 71 3.4. Lodging Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 72 3.5. Food and Beverage Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 73 4. Venue Selection Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 74 4.1. The IETF Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 75 4.2. IESG and IETF Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 76 4.3. The Internet Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 77 4.4. IETF Administrative Oversight Committee . . . . . . . . . 10 78 4.5. IETF Administrative Support Activity . . . . . . . . . . 10 79 4.6. IETF Administrative Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 80 4.7. IAOC Meeting Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 81 4.8. Venue Selection Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 82 5. Text carried forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 83 5.1. Venue Selection Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 84 5.2. Transparency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 85 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 86 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 87 8. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 88 9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 89 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 90 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 91 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 92 Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 93 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 95 1. Introduction 97 This document describes the IETF Meeting Venue Selection Process from 98 the perspective of goals, criteria and thought processes. It 99 describes the objectives and principles behind the venue selection 100 process. It also discusses the actual selection process to one level 101 of detail, and points to working documents used in execution. 103 1.1. Background 105 Following IETF 94 and at IETF 95 there was a discussion on the IETF 106 list of the selection process and criteria for IETF meetings. In 107 response to that discussion, the IAOC and the IAOC Meetings Committee 108 took it upon themselves to more publicly document its process and 109 involve community input. 111 1.2. Requirements Language 113 Requirements called out in this document are identified as either 114 "mandatory" or "desired", and considerations are tagged as 115 "Important" or "Would be nice". For clarity, the terms are defined 116 here: 118 Mandatory: If this requirement cannot be met, a location under 119 consideration is unacceptable. We walk away. 121 Desired: We would very much like to meet this requirement, but have 122 frequently been unable to. The fact that we could not meet it is 123 considered in comparison to other sites. 125 Important: Can be a make-or-break consideration, but can also be 126 traded off against other considerations. 128 Would be nice: Not make-or-break, but warrants additional 129 consideration if found to be true. 131 2. Venue Selection Objectives 133 Alissa's comment: "Why do we meet?," "Inclusiveness," and perhaps 134 reformulated versions of some other items listed, per draft- 135 sullivan-mtgvenue-decisions; 3.2) 137 Editor comment: This section is believed to be complete. /d 139 2.1. Core Values 141 The IETF has some core values that to pervade the selection process. 142 The values are not limited to the following, but at minimum include 143 them. 145 Why do we meet? 146 We meet to advance development of Internet Drafts and RFCs. We 147 also seek to facilitate attendee participation in multiple topics 148 and to enable cross-pollination of ideas and technologies. 150 Inclusiveness: 151 We would like to facilitate the onsite or remote participation of 152 anyone who wants to be involved. 154 Every country has limits on who it will permit within its borders. 155 However the IETF seeks to: 157 1. Minimize situations in which onerous entry regulations prevent 158 participants from attending meetings, or failing that to 159 distribute meeting locations such that onerous entry 160 regulations are not always experienced by the same attendees; 161 and 163 2. Avoid meeting in countries with laws that effectively exclude 164 people on the basis of race, religion, gender, sexual 165 orientation, national origin, or gender identity. 167 Where do we meet? 168 We meet in different locations globally in order to spread the 169 difficulty and cost of travel among active participants, balancing 170 travel time and expense across the regions in which IETF 171 participants are based. 173 Internet Access: 174 As an organization, we write specifications for the Internet, and 175 we use it heavily. Meeting attendees need unfiltered access to 176 the general Internet and our corporate networks, which are usually 177 reached using encrypted VPNs from the meeting venue and hotels, 178 including overflow hotels. We also need open network access 179 available at high enough data rates to support our work, including 180 the support of remote participation.[MeetingNet] 182 Focus: 183 We meet to have focused technical discussions. These are not 184 limited to scheduled breakout sessions, although of course those 185 are important. They also happen over meals or drinks -- including 186 a specific type of non-session that we call a "Bar BOF" -- or in 187 side meetings. Environments that are noisy or distracting prevent 188 that or reduce its effectiveness, and are therefore less desirable 189 as a meeting venue. 191 Economics: 192 Meeting attendees participate as individuals. While many are 193 underwritten by employers or sponsors, many are self-funded. In 194 order to reduce participations costs and travel effort, we 195 therefore seek locations that provide convenient budget 196 alternatives for food and lodging, and which are minimize travel 197 segments from major airports. Within reason, budget should not be 198 a barrier to accommodation. 200 ? There may be other points from Section 5.1.1 to move here. 202 Editor comment: This section is believed to be complete. /d 204 2.2. Venue Selection Non-Objectives 206 Alissa's comment: ( 3.1 "Political considerations," 3.4) 208 Editor comment: This section is believed to be complete. /d 210 IETF meeting venues are not selected or declined with the explicit 211 purposes of: 213 o Endorsing or condemning particular countries, political paradigms, 214 laws, regulations, or policies. 216 o Variety in site-seeing experiences. 218 3. Venue Selection Criteria 220 A number of criteria are considered during the site selection 221 process. The list following is not sorted in any particular order, 222 but includes the committee's major considerations. 224 The selection of a venue always requires trade-offs. There are no 225 perfect venues. For example, a site may not have a single hotel that 226 can accommodate a significant number of the attendees of a typical 227 IETF. That doesn't disqualify it, but it may reduce its desirability 228 in the presence of an alternative that does. 230 Each identified criterion is labeled with the terms defined above in 231 Section 1.2, i.e., "Mandatory", "Desired", "Important" or "Would be 232 nice". These terms guide the trade-off analysis portion of the 233 selection process. All "Mandatory" labeled criteria must be met for 234 a venue to be selected. The remaining terms may be viewed as 235 weighting factors. 237 There are times where the evaluation of the criteria will be 238 subjective. This is even the case for criteria labeled as 239 "Mandatory". For this reason, the IAOC and Meetings Committee will 240 specifically review, and affirm to their satisfaction, that all 241 "Mandatory" labeled criteria are satisfied by a particular venue and 242 main IETF hotel as part of the process defined below in Section 4.8. 244 3.1. Venue City Criteria 246 Alissa's comment: 3.3.1 bullets 1, 5, 6, plus other bullets from 247 Section 5.1.3.1 if reformulated as criteria) 249 Note that these considerations are not "make or break" but flexible 250 enough to allow for trade-offs and judgement on the part of the IAOC. 251 Ideally, a city will meet all criteria. If all criteria cannot be 252 met, the IETF community needs to consider the trade-off acceptable. 254 o Travel to the venue is reasonably acceptable based on cost, time, 255 and burden for participants traveling from multiple regions. It 256 is anticipated that the burden borne will be generally shared over 257 the course of the year. [Important] 259 Editor query: Resolve Important vs. Mandatory. d/ 261 o The venue is assessed as favorable for obtaining a host and 262 sponsors. That is, the Meeting is in a location and at a price 263 that it is possible and probable to find a host and sponsors. 264 [Important] 266 Editor query: Resolve Important vs. Mandatory. d/ 268 o It is possible to enter into a multi-event contract with the venue 269 to optimize meeting and attendee benefits, i.e., reduce 270 administrative costs and reduce direct attendee costs, will be 271 considered a positive factor. [Would be nice] 273 o Travel barriers to entry, e.g., visa requirements that can limit 274 participation, are acceptable to the IETF community. [Important] 276 Editor query: Resolve Important vs. Mandatory. d/ 278 o Economic, safety, and health risks associated with this venue are 279 acceptable to the IETF community. [Important] 281 Editor query: Resolve Important vs. Mandatory. d/ 283 o Available travel issue assessments (such as 284 https://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/country.html) have 285 been pointed out the IETF community. [Important] 287 Editor query: Resolve Important vs. Mandatory. d/ 289 3.2. Basic Venue Criteria 291 Alissa's comment: ( 3.3.2 bullets 1, 3, 4, 5, 6) 293 o The Meeting Space is adequate in size and layout to accommodate 294 the meeting and foster participant interaction. [Mandatory] 296 o The cost of guest rooms, meeting space, meeting food and beverage 297 is affordable (within the norms of business travel). [Mandatory] 299 o The economics of the venue allow the meeting to be net cash 300 positive [Mandatory]. 302 o An Optimal Facility for an IETF meeting is held under "One Roof", 303 that is, qualified meeting space and guest rooms are available in 304 the same facility. [Desired] 306 o An Optimal Facility for an IETF meeting is accessible by people 307 with disabilities. 309 * The selected facility conforms with local accessibility laws 310 and regulations [Mandatory] 312 * http://www.sigaccess.org/welcome-to-sigaccess/resources/ 313 accessible-conference-guide/ provides a definition of related 314 considerations that shall be used in evaluating this criterion. 315 [Desired] 317 3.3. Technical Services and Operations Criteria 319 Alissa's comment: ( 3.3.3) 321 o The Venue's support technologies and services -- network, audio- 322 video, etc., are sufficient for the anticipated activities at the 323 meeting, or the venue is willing to add such infrastructure at no 324 or at an acceptable cost to the IETF. [Mandatory] 326 o The meeting venue must permit and facilitate the delivery of a 327 high performance, robust, unfiltered and unmodified IETF Network. 328 [Mandatory] 330 o The IETF hotel(s), which are one or more hotels in close proximity 331 to the venue where the primary IETF room allocations are 332 negotiated and the IETF SSIDs are in use, must provide, or permit 333 and facilitate, the delivery of a high performance, robust, 334 unfiltered and unmodified Internet service for the public areas 335 and guest rooms. This service is typically included in the cost 336 of the room. [Mandatory] 338 o The overflow hotels should provide reasonable, reliable, 339 unfiltered Internet service for the public areas and guest rooms. 340 This service is typically included in the cost of the room. 341 [Desired] 343 3.4. Lodging Criteria 345 Alissa's comment: ( 3.3.4) 347 o The IETF hotel(s) are within close proximity to each other and the 348 venue. [Mandatory] 350 o The Guest Rooms at the IETF hotel(s) are sufficient in number to 351 house 1/3 or more of projected meeting attendees. [Mandatory] 353 o The Venue environs include budget hotels within convenient travel 354 time, cost, and effort. [Mandatory] 356 o Overflow Hotels that can be placed under contract. They typically 357 must be within convenient travel time of the venue and have a 358 variety of guest room rates. [Mandatory] 360 o The IETF hotel(s) are accessible by people with disabilities. 362 * The selected facility conforms with local accessibility laws 363 and regulations [Mandatory] 365 * http://www.sigaccess.org/welcome-to-sigaccess/resources/ 366 accessible-conference-guide/ provides a definition of related 367 considerations that shall be used in evaluating this criterion. 368 [Desired] 370 3.5. Food and Beverage Criteria 372 Alissa's comment: ( 3.3.5) 374 o The Venue environs, which includes onsite, and the areas within a 375 reasonable walking distance, or conveniently accessible by a short 376 taxi, bus, or subway ride, has convenient and inexpensive choices 377 for meals that can accommodate a wide range of dietary 378 requirements. [Mandatory] 380 o The Venue environs include grocery shopping that will accommodate 381 a wide range of dietary requirements, within a reasonable walking 382 distance, or conveniently accessible by a short taxi, bus, or 383 subway ride. [Desired] 385 4. Venue Selection Process 387 Alissa's comment: ( 2) 389 The formal structure of IETF administrative support functions is 390 documented in BCP 101 [RFC4071][RFC4371][RFC7691]. The reader is 391 expected to be familiar with the entities and roles defined by that 392 document, in particular for the IASA, ISOC, IAOC and IAD. This 393 section covers the meeting selection related roles of these and other 394 parties that participate in the process. Note that roles beyond 395 meeting selection, e.g., actually running and reporting on meetings, 396 are outside the scope of this document. 398 4.1. The IETF Community 400 While somewhat obvious to most, it is important to note that IETF 401 meetings serve all those who contribute to the development of IETF 402 RFCs. This includes those who attend meetings, from newcomer to 403 frequent attendee, to those who participate remotely, and to those 404 who don't attend but contribute to new RFCs. Potential new 405 contributors are also considered in the process. 407 IETF consensus with respect to the meeting venue selection process is 408 judged via standard IETF process and not by any other means, e.g., 409 surveys. Surveys are used to gather information related to meeting 410 venues, but not to measure consensus. 412 4.2. IESG and IETF Chair 414 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is a group comprised 415 of the IETF Area Directors and the IETF Chair. The IESG is 416 responsible for the management, along with the IAB, of the IETF, and 417 is the standards approval board for the IETF, as described in BCP9 418 [RFC2026]. This means that the IESG sets high level policies related 419 to, among other things, meeting venues. The IETF Chair is a member 420 of the IESG who, among other things, relays policies to the IAOC. 421 The IETF Chair is also a member of the IAOC. 423 4.3. The Internet Society 425 The Internet Society (ISOC) executes all venue contracts on behalf of 426 the IETF at the request of the IAOC; solicits meeting sponsorships; 427 collects all meeting-related revenues, including registration fees, 428 sponsorships, hotel commissions, and other miscellaneous revenues. 429 ISOC also provides accounting services, such as invoicing and monthly 430 financial statements. The meetings budget is managed by the IAD. 432 4.4. IETF Administrative Oversight Committee 434 The IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) has the 435 responsibility to oversee and select IETF meeting venues. It 436 instructs the IAD to work with the Internet Society to write the 437 relevant contracts. It approves the IETF meetings calendar. 439 4.5. IETF Administrative Support Activity 441 The IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA) supports the meeting 442 selection process. This includes identifying, qualifying and 443 reporting on potential meeting sites, as well as supporting meeting 444 venue contract negotiation. The IETF Secretariat is part of the IASA 445 under the management of the IAD. 447 4.6. IETF Administrative Director 449 The IETF Administrative Director (IAD) coordinates and supports the 450 activities of the IETF Secretariat, the IAOC Meetings Committee and 451 the IAOC to ensure the timely execution of the meeting process. This 452 includes participating in the IAOC Meeting Subcommittee and ensuring 453 its efforts are documented, leading venue contract negotiation, and 454 coordinating contract execution with ISOC. 456 4.7. IAOC Meeting Committee 458 The IAOC Meeting Committee is generally referred to as the Meetings 459 Committee. 461 The fundamental purpose of the committee is to participate in the 462 venue selection process, and to formulate recommendations to the IAOC 463 regarding meeting sites. It also tracks the meetings sponsorship 464 program, recommends extraordinary meeting-related expenses, and 465 recommends the IETF meetings calendar to the IAOC. The charter of 466 the committee is located here: https://iaoc.ietf.org/ 467 committees.html#meetings. 469 Membership in the Meetings Committee is at the discretion of the 470 IAOC; it includes an IAOC appointed chair, the IETF Administrative 471 Director (IAD), IAOC members, representatives from the Secretariat, 472 and interested members of the community. 474 4.8. Venue Selection Phases 476 Alissa's comment: ( 3.5, perhaps with additional detail currently 477 in 3.3.1 bullets 2, 3, 4) 479 Commencing the process four years in advance of an event results in 480 the following schedule as a guideline: 482 Phase 1: Identification and Preliminary Investigation 483 Four years out, a process identifies cities for meetings and 484 initiates site selection. 486 A. The IAOC selects regions for meetings. 488 B. Meeting target cities per region are provided to the 489 Secretariat based upon Meetings Committee input and, if known, 490 host preferences. 492 C. Potential venues in preferred cities identified and 493 investigated, including reviews of Official Advisory Sources, 494 consultation with specialty travel services, frequent 495 travelers and local contacts to identify possible barriers to 496 holding a successful meeting in the target cities. 498 D. Investigated cities and findings are provided by the 499 Secretariat to the Meetings Committee for review. Meetings 500 Committee makes a recommendation to the IAOC of investigated/ 501 target cities to consider further as well as issues identified 502 and the results of research conducted. 504 Phase 2: Community Consultation 505 The IAOC asks the community whether there are any barriers to 506 holding a successful meeting in the target cities. Community 507 responses are reviewed and concerns investigated. The IAOC shall 508 maintain a public web page that lists all target cities, when 509 community input was solicited, and summarized review results. 510 Once review results are published the IAOC provides a list of 511 vetted cities to the Meetings Committee to pursue as potential 512 meeting locations. 514 Phase 3: Vetted Venues Evaluated for Site Qualification Visit 516 A. Secretariat Assesses "vetted" target cities to determine 517 availability and conformance to criteria 519 B. Meetings Committee approves potential cities for site 520 qualification visit. 522 C. Site qualification visits are arranged by Secretariat and 523 preliminary negotiations are undertaken with selected 524 potential sites 526 D. Site qualification visit is conducted using the checklist from 527 https://iaoc.ietf.org/meetings-committee/venue-selection.html; 528 The site visit team prepares a site report and discusses it 529 with the Meetings Committee. 531 Phase 4: Qualified Venues Evaluated for Contract 532 2.75 - 3 years out, initiate contract negotiations. 534 A. The Meetings Committee reviews the venue options based on 535 venue selection criteria and recommends a venue to the IAOC. 536 Only options that meet all Mandatory labeled criteria may be 537 recommended. 539 B. IAOC selects a venue for contracting as well as a back-up 540 contracting venue, if available. 542 C. Secretariat negotiates with selected venue. IAD reviews 543 contract and requests IAOC and ISOC approval of contract and 544 authority for Secretariat to execute contract on ISOC's 545 behalf. 547 D. Contracts are executed. 549 Phase 5: Evaluation and Contingency Planning 550 3 Months Prior to the Meeting, the meeting site is checked for 551 continued availability and conformance to expectations. 553 A. Secretariat reviews current status of the contracted meeting 554 location to confirm there is no change in the location status 555 and to identify possible new barriers to holding a successful 556 meeting in the contracted city and provides findings to the 557 IAOC. 559 B. IAOC considers the information provided and evaluates the risk 560 - if significant risk is identified, the Contingency Planning 561 Flow Chart (https://iaoc.ietf.org/meetings-committee/venue- 562 selection.html) is followed, if current risk is not 563 significant, the situation is monitored through the meeting to 564 ensure there is no significant change. 566 5. Text carried forward 568 This document is being reorganized along an outline proposed by 569 Alissa Cooper. In preceding sections, her comment is made explicit. 570 That is intended to be removed when the reorganization is complete. 571 Text in this section is left over and will potentially be moved to 572 preceding sections. 574 5.1. Venue Selection Process 576 The process of selecting a venue is described below and is based on 577 https://iaoc.ietf.org/venue-selection.html. 579 5.1.1. Venue Selection Principles 581 heading paragraph moved to Section 2. 583 Who are we? 584 We are computer scientists, engineers, network operators, 585 academics, and other interested parties sharing the goal of making 586 the Internet work better. At this time, the vast majority of 587 attendees come from North America, Western and Central Europe, and 588 Eastern Asia. We also have participants from other regions. 590 Why do we meet? Moved to Section 2. 592 Where do we meet? moved to Section 2.1 594 Inclusiveness: Moved to Section 2.1. 596 Internet Access: Moved to Section 2.1. 598 Focus: Moved to Section 2.1. 600 Economics: Moved to Section 2.1. 602 Political considerations: moved to Section 2.2 and reworded per 603 Alissa's suggested text. 605 5.1.2. Venue Selection Objectives 607 Venues for meetings are selected to advance the objectives of the 608 IETF, which are discussed in https://www.ietf.org/about/mission.html. 609 The IAOC's supporting objectives include: 611 o Advancing standards development 613 o Facilitating participation by active contributors 614 o Sharing the travel pain; balancing travel time and expense across 615 the regions from where IETF participants are based. 617 o Encouraging new contributors 619 o Generating funds to support IETF operations in support of 620 standards development, including the Secretariat, IASA, and the 621 RFC Editor. 623 There is an explicit intent to rotate meeting locations equally among 624 several places in accordance with IETF policy. However, a consistent 625 balance is sometimes difficult to achieve. The IAOC has an objective 626 of setting the Regions 4 years in advance, meeting in Europe, North 627 America, and Asia, with a possibility of occasionally meeting outside 628 those regions. This policy, known as the 1-1-1* model, is set by the 629 IESG, https://iaoc.ietf.org/minutes/2010-11-10-iaoc-minutes.txt, and 630 is further discussed in [I-D.krishnan-ietf-meeting-policy]. The 631 reason for the multi-year timeframe is maximization of opportunities; 632 the smaller the time available to qualify and contract a conference 633 venue, the more stress imposed on the qualification process, and the 634 greater the risk of not finding a suitable venue or paying more for 635 it. 637 There is no formal policy regarding rotation of regions, the time of 638 year for a meeting in a specific region, or whether a meeting in a 639 non-targeted region replaces a visit to one of the regions during 640 that year. 642 The IETF chair drives selection of "*" locations, i.e., venues 643 outside the usual regions, and requires community input. These 644 selections usually arise from evidence of growing interest and 645 participation in the new region. Expressions of interest from 646 possible hosts also factor into the meeting site selection process, 647 for any meeting. 649 Increased participation in the IETF from those other regions, 650 electronically or in person, could result in basic changes to the 651 overall pattern, and we encourage those who would like for that to 652 occur to encourage participation from those regions. 654 5.1.3. Venue Selection Criteria 656 Heading text moved to Section 3. 658 5.1.3.1. Venue City Considerations 660 o Consideration will be given to whether it makes sense to enter 661 into a multi-event contract with the venue to optimize meeting and 662 attendee benefits, i.e., reduce administrative costs and reduce 663 direct attendee costs. [Would be nice] 665 5.1.3.2. Basic Venue Criteria 667 o moved to Section 3.2 669 o The venue and hotels can be put under contract. The subsequent 670 failure to put a selected venue under contract will result in a 671 re-evaluation of the venues and selection for the meeting. 672 [Mandatory] 674 5.1.4. Venue Selection Phases 676 5.1.5. Experience Notes 678 a. The foregoing process works with reasonable certainty in North 679 America and Europe. 681 b. Experience to date for Asia and Latin America is that contracts 682 take longer and often will not be executed more than two years in 683 advance of the meeting. While the IETF will have the first 684 option for the dates, for reasons not completely understood 685 contracts won't be executed. 687 5.2. Transparency 689 BCP 101 requires transparency in IASA process and contracts, and 690 thereby of the meetings committee. BCP 101 also states that the IAOC 691 approves what information is to remain confidential. Therefore any 692 information produced by the meetings committee or related to meetings 693 that individuals believe is confidential, e.g., venue contracts, must 694 be confirmed to be confidential by the IAOC. 696 6. IANA Considerations 698 This memo asks the IANA for no new parameters. 700 7. Security Considerations 702 This note proposes no protocols, and therefore no new protocol 703 insecurities. 705 8. Privacy Considerations 707 This note reveals no personally identifying information apart from 708 its authorship. 710 9. Acknowledgements 712 This document was originally assembled and edited by Fred Baker. 713 Additional commentary came from Jari Arkko, Scott Bradner, and Alissa 714 Cooper. It was discussed on mtgvenue@ietf.org. 716 10. References 718 10.1. Normative References 720 [I-D.krishnan-ietf-meeting-policy] 721 Krishnan, S., "High level guidance for the meeting policy 722 of the IETF", draft-krishnan-ietf-meeting-policy-01 (work 723 in progress), July 2016. 725 [MeetingNet] 726 O'Donoghue, K., Martin, J., Elliott, C., and J. Jaeggli, 727 "IETF Meeting Network Requirements", WEB 728 https://iaoc.ietf.org/ietf-network-requirements.html. 730 [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 731 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, DOI 10.17487/RFC2026, October 1996, 732 . 734 [RFC4071] Austein, R., Ed. and B. Wijnen, Ed., "Structure of the 735 IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA)", BCP 101, 736 RFC 4071, DOI 10.17487/RFC4071, April 2005, 737 . 739 [RFC4371] Carpenter, B., Ed. and L. Lynch, Ed., "BCP 101 Update for 740 IPR Trust", BCP 101, RFC 4371, DOI 10.17487/RFC4371, 741 January 2006, . 743 [RFC7691] Bradner, S., Ed., "Updating the Term Dates of IETF 744 Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) Members", 745 BCP 101, RFC 7691, DOI 10.17487/RFC7691, November 2015, 746 . 748 10.2. Informative References 750 [I-D.barnes-healthy-food] 751 Barnes, M., "Healthy Food and Special Dietary Requirements 752 for IETF meetings", draft-barnes-healthy-food-07 (work in 753 progress), July 2013. 755 Appendix A. Change Log 757 2016-01-12: Initial version 759 2016-01-21: Update to reflect https://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/ 760 VenueSelectionCriteriaJan2016.pdf and 761 https://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/VenueSelectionProcess11Jan16.pdf, 762 accessed from https://iaoc.ietf.org/private/privatemeetings.html. 764 2016-02-23: Reorganize and capture IAOC Meetings Committee 765 discussions. 767 2016-03-03: Final from Design Team. 769 2016-03-17: First update incorporating mtgvenue@ietf.org comments 771 2016-05-20 Updated in accordance with editing by Laura Nugent, Dave 772 Crocker, Lou Berger, Fred Baker, and others. 774 posting as working group draft August 2, 2016 776 Reorganized per Alissa Cooper outline Work in progress. In 777 addition, contributors were re-organized to be authors. 779 2016-10-28 Editor changeover. Further alignment with guidance by 780 Alissa Cooper, Andrew Sullivan and the mgtvenue working group. 781 Many various changes. 783 Authors' Addresses 785 Ray Pelletier 786 Internet Society 788 Email: rpelletier@isoc.org 790 Laura Nugent 791 Association Management Solutions 793 Email: lnugent@amsl.com 794 Dave Crocker (editor) 795 Brandenburg InternetWorking 797 Email: dcrocker@bbiw.net 799 Lou Berger 800 LabN Consulting, L.L.C. 802 Email: lberger@labn.net 804 Ole Jacobsen 805 The Internet Protocol Journal 807 Email: olejacobsen@me.com 809 Jim Martin 810 INOC 812 Email: jim@inoc.com 814 Fred Baker (editor) 815 Santa Barbara, California 93117 816 USA 818 Email: FredBaker.IETF@gmail.com