Subject: Re: [87attendees] [87all] IETF 87 Berlin Meeting Review

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 09:30:07 -0500

Ray, this is just a thought, and I'm embarrassed I didn't think of it in
Orlando, but if the conference hotel can tag 30 walkers in advance, could
they go one step further and tag 30 people who didn't travel
intercontinentally to get there?

I don't know whether I'll be in the conference hotel in Dallas next time,
but I was last time; it would be morally wrong to check me in after a
30-minute commute and walk someone else after 24 hours in transit :-)

Spencer, who's not JUST jealous that he didn't get walked to one of the
Nick cartoon suites ...

On Wednesday, August 14, 2013, Ray Pelletier wrote:

> All;
>
> I wanted to give you some feedback on the meeting in Berlin.
>
> IETF 87 Brings Record Number of Attendees!
>
> Congratulations!  With 1,435 attendees (1,381 paid and 54 comped) in
> Berlin, including 199 from Germany!, IETF 87 is the most attended meeting
> since 1,450 attended IETF 63 in Paris in 2005.  The IETF is now even more
> global with representatives from 62 countries attending, a new high.  See <
> http://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/IETF-Regional-Attendance-00.pdf>.
>
> Rock-Solid Meeting Network!
>
> Once again attendees enjoyed a rock-solid network throughout the week.
>  There were very few tickets and only some early v6 failures that were
> quickly resolved.
>
> The network team of Verilan and the IETF Volunteers (Vols) began arriving
> Tuesday, 23 August to configure equipment and set up.  Upon finding that
> one of the Juniper routers had been damaged in transit, an emergency call
> to Juniper resulted in two routers delivered immediately to the site.
>  Thank you Juniper.
>
> Thanks also to Deutsche Telekom (DT) for their early delivery of the
> circuits and Clemens Schrimpe for getting the links up and tested in
> advance, which significantly shortened the setup time.
>
> The Team was able to get the InterContinental guest rooms Internet
> supported by the IETF shortly after noon on Friday, an event that usually
> occurs Saturday or even Sunday.  Great job.
>
> A pilot of the NAT64 network was set up and feedback is that it worked
> reasonably well.
>
> Thanks to the IETF Vols and Verilan for another great meeting network.
>
> Value Added Tax (VAT)
>
> This was the first meeting the IAOC encountered the Value Added Tax (VAT)
> and its impact on revenues and expenses.  Upon advice of tax experts the
> IAOC found that the IETF was required to charge a 19% VAT on meeting fees
> in Germany.  Instead of adding the VAT charge on top of the base
> registration fee, the IAOC elected to include the VAT within the existing
> fee structure.  This means that registration revenues are lower than
> previously expected, creating a shortfall of $137,000 USD.
>
> Employers may be be able to recover their employee's VAT on registration,
> lodging and food and beverage.  Additional details can be found at the VAT
> FAQ:  <https://www.ietf.org/meeting/87/vat.html>  This impact to the
> budget will be offset somewhat by our ability to recover VAT of about
> $65,000 USD on meeting expenses.
>
> We are not yet certain how VAT may apply to future meetings, and are
> currently investigating the tax regulations for both Vancouver and London.
> When VAT charges do apply, the IAOC will review each situation and may
> choose to implement the VAT differently than it was handled for IETF 87.
>
> Overbooking of InterContinental
>
> We were notified by the InterContinental that they were overbooked for
> Sunday, 28 July and that they would be arranging and paying for
> accommodations at a nearby five star hotel for 30 IETFers for that evening.
>  We requested that each affected attendee be notified in advance and also
> that the InterContinental work to minimize the number who needed to be
> moved.  In the end there were 16 who stayed at the Hotel Palace and only
> one who showed up at the InterContinental not having received the notice
> prior to arrival.
>
> Onsite Issues
>
> There were a few glitches in the operations during the week, but
> improvements were made quickly, such as the Grab-N-Go experience on Monday
> and ensuring enough of the right kinds of soft drinks.
> The Secretariat reports that it was very pleased with the responsiveness
> and professionalism of the InterContinental staff.
>
> Remote Participation
>
> In response to feedback from remote participants a new section called
> Remote Participation was added to the meeting home page to assist those
> offsite with finding information they need in one location.  It will remain
> and be enhanced from community input.
>
> Bits-n-Bites
>
> Bits-N-Bites turned out to be a popular event again with good exhibits, a
> great turnout and lots of food.  Problems with shipping, customs and
> electrical power created some anxiety before the event, but with quick work
> by John Brzozowski and staff adaptations were made, and with these lessons
> learned we anticipate such issues will not recur.
>
> I've listed all of the Berlin meeting and Bit-N-Bites sponsors below.
>  Thanks for your support.  We could not have successful meetings without
> you.  Thanks again to DENIC for stepping up when we had no Host and
> arranging for the social at the German Museum of Technology.  It was grand.
>
> IETF 88 in Vancouver begins on 3 November, just 3 months from now.  We
> hope to see you there!
>
> Ray
> IETF Administrative Director
>
> PS:  See also IETF Chair, Jari Arkko, blog:
> http://www.ietf.org/blog/2013/08/meeting-summary/
>
> IETF 87 Sponsors
>
> Platinum                                DENIC
> Gold                            EURid
> Gold                            DTAG
> Bronze                          Dyn
> Bronze                          eco
>
> Connectivity                    DTAG
>
> Welcome Reception               EURid
>
>
> Ice Cream Social                ADVA Optical Networking
>
> Bits-N-Bites
>  A10 Networks
>  Comcast
>  Dyn
>  Huawei
>  ICANN
>  Internet Society
>  nominum
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 87all mailing list
> [email-masked] <javascript:;>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/87all
>

---

From: Ray Pelletier <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 10:35:19 -0400

On Aug 14, 2013, at 10:30 AM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:

> Ray, this is just a thought, and I'm embarrassed I didn't think of it in Orlando, but if the conference hotel can tag 30 walkers in advance, could they go one step further and tag 30 people who didn't travel intercontinentally to get there?

That's a good question.  Do others feel the same way?  Of course, as in Orlando, they asked us to select ones not to move and we refused.  There are no VIPs.  We asked them to make the selection a random one.

Ray

> 
> I don't know whether I'll be in the conference hotel in Dallas next time, but I was last time; it would be morally wrong to check me in after a 30-minute commute and walk someone else after 24 hours in transit :-)
> 
> Spencer, who's not JUST jealous that he didn't get walked to one of the Nick cartoon suites ...
> 
> Congratulations!  With 1,435 attendees (1,381 paid and 54 comped) in Berlin, including 199 from Germany!, IETF 87 is the most attended meeting since 1,450 attended IETF 63 in Paris in 2005.  The IETF is now even more global with representatives from 62 countries attending, a new high.  See <http://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/IETF-Regional-Attendance-00.pdf>.
> 
> Once again attendees enjoyed a rock-solid network throughout the week.  There were very few tickets and only some early v6 failures that were quickly resolved.
> 
> The network team of Verilan and the IETF Volunteers (Vols) began arriving Tuesday, 23 August to configure equipment and set up.  Upon finding that one of the Juniper routers had been damaged in transit, an emergency call to Juniper resulted in two routers delivered immediately to the site.  Thank you Juniper.
> 
> Thanks also to Deutsche Telekom (DT) for their early delivery of the circuits and Clemens Schrimpe for getting the links up and tested in advance, which significantly shortened the setup time.
> 
> The Team was able to get the InterContinental guest rooms Internet supported by the IETF shortly after noon on Friday, an event that usually occurs Saturday or even Sunday.  Great job.
> 
> A pilot of the NAT64 network was set up and feedback is that it worked reasonably well.
> 
> This was the first meeting the IAOC encountered the Value Added Tax (VAT) and its impact on revenues and expenses.  Upon advice of tax experts the IAOC found that the IETF was required to charge a 19% VAT on meeting fees in Germany.  Instead of adding the VAT charge on top of the base registration fee, the IAOC elected to include the VAT within the existing fee structure.  This means that registration revenues are lower than previously expected, creating a shortfall of $137,000 USD.
> 
> Employers may be be able to recover their employee's VAT on registration, lodging and food and beverage.  Additional details can be found at the VAT FAQ:  <https://www.ietf.org/meeting/87/vat.html>  This impact to the budget will be offset somewhat by our ability to recover VAT of about $65,000 USD on meeting expenses.
> 
> We are not yet certain how VAT may apply to future meetings, and are currently investigating the tax regulations for both Vancouver and London. When VAT charges do apply, the IAOC will review each situation and may choose to implement the VAT differently than it was handled for IETF 87.
> 
> We were notified by the InterContinental that they were overbooked for Sunday, 28 July and that they would be arranging and paying for accommodations at a nearby five star hotel for 30 IETFers for that evening.  We requested that each affected attendee be notified in advance and also that the InterContinental work to minimize the number who needed to be moved.  In the end there were 16 who stayed at the Hotel Palace and only one who showed up at the InterContinental not having received the notice prior to arrival.
> 
> Onsite Issues
> 
> There were a few glitches in the operations during the week, but improvements were made quickly, such as the Grab-N-Go experience on Monday and ensuring enough of the right kinds of soft drinks.
> The Secretariat reports that it was very pleased with the responsiveness and professionalism of the InterContinental staff.
> 
> Remote Participation
> 
> In response to feedback from remote participants a new section called Remote Participation was added to the meeting home page to assist those offsite with finding information they need in one location.  It will remain and be enhanced from community input.
> 
> Bits-n-Bites
> 
> Bits-N-Bites turned out to be a popular event again with good exhibits, a great turnout and lots of food.  Problems with shipping, customs and electrical power created some anxiety before the event, but with quick work by John Brzozowski and staff adaptations were made, and with these lessons learned we anticipate such issues will not recur.
> 
> I've listed all of the Berlin meeting and Bit-N-Bites sponsors below.  Thanks for your support.  We could not have successful meetings without you.  Thanks again to DENIC for stepping up when we had no Host and arranging for the social at the German Museum of Technology.  It was grand.
> 
> IETF 88 in Vancouver begins on 3 November, just 3 months from now.  We hope to see you there!
> 
> Ray
> PS:  See also IETF Chair, Jari Arkko, blog:  http://www.ietf.org/blog/2013/08/meeting-summary/
> 
> IETF 87 Sponsors
> 
> Platinum                                DENIC
> Gold                            EURid
> Gold                            DTAG
> Bronze                          Dyn
> Bronze                          eco
> 
> Connectivity                    DTAG
> 
> Welcome Reception               EURid
> 
> 
> [email-masked]
> 87attendees mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/87attendees

---

From: Yoav Nir <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 14:40:15 +0000

> That's a good question.  Do others feel the same way?  Of course, as in Orlando, they asked us to select ones not to move and we refused.  There are no VIPs.  We asked them to make the selection a…

I don't. Once you've had to fly in, it doesn't make much of a difference whether you've flown a couple of hours (like if you come to Vancouver from Toronto), or from the other side of the world.

---

From: Dan Harkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 14:53:50 +0000

On 8/14/13 7:35 AM, "Ray Pelletier" <[email-masked]> wrote:

>That's a good question.  Do others feel the same way?  Of course, as in
>Orlando, they asked us to select ones not to move and we refused.  There
>are no VIPs.  We asked them to make the selection a random one.

  When I checked in I had just arrived in Berlin after 10 days vacation in
Europe-- my flight was around 2 hours. The extremely nice woman at the
counter
looked at my (US) passport and assumed I had just arrived on a
transatlantic
flight and commented about how tired I must be and would I like to be
upgraded
to a junior suite. 

  The point is, I don't think we enter our commute/travel times when we
register
so random is the fairest way of handling this sort of thing.

  Dan.

>global with representatives from 62 countries
> attending, a new high.  See
><http://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/IETF-Regional-Attendance-00.pdf>.
>
>to Juniper resulted in two routers delivered
> immediately to the site.  Thank you Juniper.
>
>in Germany.  Instead of adding the VAT
> charge on top of the base registration fee, the IAOC elected to include
>the VAT within the existing fee structure.  This means that registration
>revenues are lower than previously expected, creating a shortfall of
>$137,000 USD.
>
>lodging and food and beverage.  Additional details can be found at the
>VAT FAQ:  <https://www.ietf.org/meeting/87/vat.html>
>  This impact to the budget will be offset somewhat by our ability to
>recover VAT of about $65,000 USD on meeting expenses.
>
>currently investigating the tax regulations for both Vancouver and
>London. When VAT charges do apply, the IAOC will review each situation
>and may choose to implement the VAT differently than
> it was handled for IETF 87.
>
>accommodations at a nearby five star hotel for 30 IETFers for that
>evening.  We requested that each affected attendee be notified
> in advance and also that the InterContinental work to minimize the
>number who needed to be moved.  In the end there were 16 who stayed at
>the Hotel Palace and only one who showed up at the InterContinental not
>having received the notice prior to arrival.
>
>Onsite Issues
>
>improvements were made quickly, such as the Grab-N-Go experience on
>Monday and ensuring enough of the right kinds of soft drinks.
>offsite with finding information they need in one location.  It will
>remain and be enhanced from community input.
>
>Bits-n-Bites
>
>electrical power created some anxiety before the event, but with quick
>work by John Brzozowski and staff adaptations
> were made, and with these lessons learned we anticipate such issues will
>not recur.
>

---

From: Ole Jacobsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 08:03:25 -0700 (PDT)

On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, Dan Harkins wrote:

>   When I checked in I had just arrived in Berlin after 10 days 
> vacation in Europe-- my flight was around 2 hours. The extremely 
> nice woman at the counter looked at my (US) passport and assumed I 
> had just arrived on a transatlantic flight and commented about how 
> tired I must be and would I like to be upgraded to a junior suite.
> 
>   The point is, I don't think we enter our commute/travel times when 
> we register so random is the fairest way of handling this sort of 
> thing.
> 
>   Dan.
> 

Same here, sort of. I came by train from Leipzig which is about an
hour from Berlin. The A/C in our car failed so I am sure I was just
as grumpy and tired as some of the ones who had travelled much further 
that day ;=)

The Club Lounge at the Intercontinental was amongst the best I have
ever experienced. Definitely worth the extra cost.

Ole

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 11:33:27 -0400

> I don't. Once you've had to fly in, it doesn't make much of a difference whether you've flown a couple of hours (like if you come to Vancouver from Toronto), or from the other side of the world.

This isn't my experience.  I have often flown a couple hours and then
gone directly to a meeting -- it's not much different to me than
driving a couple hours (and indeed, is often less stressful).  But
trans-oceanic (or trans-continental, for that matter) flights seem to
be much worse.

My personal limit appears to be somewhere between 2 and 3 hours travel
time.  Within that, I don't seem to find the trip any more tiring than
I used to find commuting by car to an office.  Outside of that, I
usually want to rest.  This is as true by train, however, so I don't
think it's the conveyancce that matters.  

Maybe we could self-select, though.  We could add a checkbox to the
registration form, "I won't complain too loudly on the attendees list
if the hotel bumps me."  In the event there's a problem, the
secretariat could provide the list to the hotel.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 11:34:53 -0400

> That's a good question.  Do others feel the same way?  Of course, as in Orlando, they asked us to select ones not to move and we refused.  There are no VIPs.  We asked them to make the selection a…

Liberté, égalité, fraternité!

That said, there are several problems with this proposal.   First, how do we know where people are coming from?   They may not be coming from home, and they may have registered with a corporate address a continent away from home.   Second, what is happening the next day?  If I'd been walked Saturday night, I would have faced an early morning with less sleep and a longer walk.   A non-IESG, non-IAB participant likely would have slept in.   So I think singling Spencer out to be walked because he lives in Dallas might actually be a bad outcome, although I agree that we shouldn't treat him (or me) like a VIP either.

I tend to agree that letting the hotel choose randomly is a better idea than playing favorites, but of course the hotel will choose non-rewards-program or low-tier rewards program members over others, so that could produce a less than desirable outcome.   Probably the most egalitarian outcome would result from the ISOC doing a random drawing.   But honestly, is it worth all the effort?

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 11:45:13 -0400

> secretariat could provide the list to the hotel.
Put me within 5 minutes walking distance and buy me lunch at the 
conference hotel every day (ok, maybe 3 times), and I'm in.

Keith

---

From: Brian Dickson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 12:20:57 -0400

> secretariat could provide the list to the hotel.

I agree that this is a good idea.

Note that there is a financial side - bumping is usually associated with
one or more free nights.
For individuals paying their own way, this may be something they want.
(For me, since the company pays, it's a wash, and I'm happy to let others
volunteer.)

Brian

---

From: Jakob Heitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 16:23:04 +0000

Don't bump anyone.
Apply a cancelation fee.

--
Jakob Heitz.

On Aug 14, 2013, at 9:21 AM, "Brian Dickson" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

Note that there is a financial side - bumping is usually associated with one or more free nights.
For individuals paying their own way, this may be something they want.
(For me, since the company pays, it's a wash, and I'm happy to let others volunteer.)

Brian
_______________________________________________
87attendees mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/87attendees

---

From: Phil Hunt <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 09:58:30 -0700

When I attempted to check-in Monday morning, the Hotel informed me there was a large gov't contingent holding the rooms and they would be checking out late.

I was unable to check in until Monday evening (6:30).  A bit of a pain having a arrived on an overnight flight.

The overbooking seemed to be because of multiple conferences rather than overbooking by IETF attendees.

Note to self:  next time I fly overnight, I'll book the previous night at the conference hotel too (and apparently enjoy the walk on arrival).

Phil

@independentid
www.independentid.com
[email-masked]

On 2013-08-14, at 9:23 AM, Jakob Heitz <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Don't bump anyone.
> Apply a cancelation fee.
> 
> --
> Jakob Heitz.
> 
> 
> On Aug 14, 2013, at 9:21 AM, "Brian Dickson" <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>

---

From: Yoav Nir <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 17:03:38 +0000

> trans-oceanic (or trans-continental, for that matter) flights seem to

I agree that long flights are a hassle. The shortest ones for me are to Prague at 4 hours. And jet-lag is an issue. But I don't see why it should matter for the question of who gets bumped.

---

From: Spencer Dawkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 12:18:53 -0500

> secretariat could provide the list to the hotel.

I was actually asking Ray what was possible (and I had forgotten the 
"please tell us who to walk" moment from Orlando, so I was kind of 
expecting the answer to be "the hotel fills up the rooms they have in 
arrival order and then starts walking people"), and didn't intend my 
question to be a proposal (whether well thought out or not). But thanks 
to all for your thoughts.

I take the point several people made, that having the hotel (or the 
secretariat) divine where we came from and how far we traveled and what 
condition we're likely to arrive in doesn't seem robust, and also the 
point that some people might be willing to be walked for reasons that 
don't involve (real or imaginary) travel time.

If the registration form had a checkbox as Andrew described, I'd check 
it for Dallas, and probably for Vancouver and for Toronto as well. Even 
if I turned out to be the only one who checked it, I might meet 
different folks than I would have in the conference hotel, and if I 
ended up in the Nickelodeon cartoon section as people did in Orlando, 
I'd be even better prepared for the IETF week :-)

Spencer, who is not on the IAOC ...

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 10:25:12 -0700

On 8/14/2013 10:18 AM, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
> it for Dallas, and probably for Vancouver and for Toronto as well.

This entire thread seems to be based on the view that we should help 
hotels mishandle a very large block of reservations.

Reservations at a hotel are not supposed to be a 'hope' of a room, but a 
commitment for one, with the hotel suffering serious penalty for getting 
things wrong.  I don't mean merely that they find some other room 
somewhere else, inconveniencing their now-non-guest, but cost that hurts 
the hotel.

An error of the scale of 25 rooms indicates that the hotel did not take 
its responsibility seriously enough.  It goes far beyond the typical 
statistics of "sometimes the numbers don't quite align", as inevitably 
happens with hotels, but isn't supposed to happen often.  It represents 
mismanagement.

That the error seems to be happening more than once suggests that our 
contracts are not forceful enough.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 14:34:50 -0400

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 10:25:12AM -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:
> but a commitment for one, with the hotel suffering serious penalty
> for getting things wrong.

I used to work in hotels, when I was still hoping that them Corporate
Philosopher job postings were going to materialize.  I can assure you
that the hotel _does_ suffer a serious penalty.

First, there is a significant cost in having staff running around
trying to find rooms.  In cases where the hotel I was in was oversold,
it inevitably happened when the other hotels were also relatively
full.  Finding a room -- any room -- took time, and it generally had
to be done by hand.  This is probably better these days -- at the
time, we mostly worked on the phone -- but it's still staff people
chasing the problem, and ievitably you realise that you really have a
problem when your forecast numbers are running below actual arrivals.

Second, the hotel actually has to confirm that reservation, which
means that the hotel is at least out the money if the covered
reservation doesn't show.

Third, depending on the hotel, the grouchiness of the guest who
presents, and the terms of the reservation, the overbooked hotel is
usually actually paying for the room occupied by the guest (this is
the "free nights" provision).  Hotels do offer one another discounted
rates for this, but it's still not nothing, and if you're wrong by a
lot of rooms it can easily blow away your profit for a night.
Moreover, in a full hotel margins are reasonably good, but overall the
hotel industry works on pretty thin margins.  Those thin margins are
in fact what allow us to negotiate the enormous blocks we do: the
hotel wants to fill the rooms ("heads in beds") very, very badly.

These absolutely are costs that negatively affect the hotel.
Moreover, they're _really_ costs that affect the front office manager,
whose very job depends on skating exactly on the line of ensuring both
high occupancy and high room revenue while not ending up with hard or
soft costs (roughly, money to another hotel or a dissatisfied guest).
That's the basis on which front office managers are evaluated, and
people who get this too wrong too far too often (and these are all
sensitive to local market condtions) aren't front office managers for
very long.

> That the error seems to be happening more than once suggests that
> our contracts are not forceful enough.

Actually, it suggests that we're paying room rates in the lower end of
the scale.  Hotels are _always_ going to walk the people that
represent the lowest likely overall room revenue, just like any other
economic agent.  Presumably, as the hotel fills, we're paying well
below what the room will attract in revenue (either that day or, as
likely, over the long haul).  You could reduce your chances of being
walked by registering at the hotel outside the IETF block, paying
regular rates that are higher than our block rate.

A

PS: In some places (particularly in urban parts of North America), you
can often increase your odds of getting a room (or an upgrade) by
tipping the front desk clerk, being sure to accept help from the
bellhop and tipping him/her, &c.  I know someone will be outraged by
this fact.  It doesn't make it less factlike.

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 15 Aug 2013 09:25:03 -0400

> as grumpy and tired as some of the ones who had travelled much further

I came from Groningen in NL, which due to trackwork involved a regional 
train, a bustitution through rural eastern NL, a local train, an IC that 
was supposed to go through to Berlin but terminated in Hannover due to 
flood damage, and an overcrowded ICE (due to all the people dumped off the 
IC) where I only got a seat because I am a nerd, looked at the platform 
train map, and knew exactly where to stand so I would be at the correct 
door when the train stopped.

So, yes, it was nice to get a room at my hotel and take a shower.  The 
draft beer on the ICE helped, too.

By the way, the wifi on Dutch regional trains is amazing.  It is free, it 
works well, and it knows what train you're on so the startup page shows 
your upcoming stations with delay info updated in real time.

Regards,
John Levine, [email-masked], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly

PS: I also agree that it is not in our interest to help hotels walk 
people.  It's their mistake, it's up to them to deal with it, they can see 
where people are from and estimate how far they've come.

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 15 Aug 2013 09:28:29 -0400

> Don't bump anyone.  Apply a cancelation fee.

Not an option.  If the hotel has more people than rooms, they have to bump 
someone, and there's no way to force a person who's checked into a room 
out of it.

Regards,
John Levine, [email-masked], Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
"I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly.

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 22:31:15 +0900

> Not an option.  If the hotel has more people than rooms, they have to
> bump someone, and there's no way to force a person who's checked into
> a room out of it.

but we need someone to BLAME!!!!

randy

---

From: Mikael Abrahamsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 16:57:21 +0200 (CEST)

On Thu, 15 Aug 2013, John R Levine wrote:

> bump someone, and there's no way to force a person who's checked into a 
> room out of it.

Airlines usually offer people cash or other incentive to take a later 
flight. So whilst there is no way to *force* someone out of a room, 
nothing says the hotel can't buy them out of it.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: [email-masked]

---

From: Jakob Heitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 15:13:31 +0000

Don't book more people than rooms.
If a booked person doesn't show, let the hotel charge that person a cancellation fee to cover revenue lost due to empty rooms.

--
Jakob Heitz.

On Aug 15, 2013, at 6:28 AM, "John R Levine" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Not an option.  If the hotel has more people than rooms, they have to bump someone, and there's no way to force a person who's checked into a room out of it.
> 
> Regards,

---

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:18:37 -0400

I don't think we should imagine that we can have a major influence on 
the booking policies of hotel chains. I'm sure they think long and hard 
about this, and the tradeoffs that overbooking entails. (Just as 
airlines clearly do.)

Do major hotel chains differ in a significant way about how they handle 
this? If so, maybe we could insist on being told what the policy is, and 
then use that as a factor in which hotels we choose.

	Thanks,
	Paul

---

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 10:22:02 -0500

> Don't book more people than rooms.
[MB] The hotels book based on anticipated a specific number/percentage of
no shows - that's standard business practice and is not unlike what the
airlines do. Andrew Sullivan provided all the detail as to how it works
based on his own firsthand experiences.   I do wonder if the numbers vary
for conferences as to the average public.  I would think the IETF no show
rate, for example, might be lower than the average no show rate.   My guess
also is that they had more people from the other conference extend their
stays.  As someone else noted, they aren't going to kick someone out of a
room - that's guaranteed revenue. There's always a chance there will be no
shows - flight delays, illness, etc.    [/MB]

If a booked person doesn't show, let the hotel charge that person a
> cancellation fee to cover revenue lost due to empty rooms.
>
[MB] They already do that - you can find any reservation has a cancel by
date/time. If you don't cancel by then, they will charge you the first
nights rate. [/MB]

---

From: Phil Hunt <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 08:26:03 -0700

I wonder if we are adding to the problem. So many IETFers book as soon as the meeting is announced but then change their reservation to adjust to actual travel. 

Is this leading hotels to think they have more rooms than they think? Particularly on mondays?

Phil

On 2013-08-15, at 8:18, Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]> wrote:

> I don't think we should imagine that we can have a major influence on the booking policies of hotel chains. I'm sure they think long and hard about this, and the tradeoffs that overbooking entails. (Just as airlines clearly do.)
> 
> Do major hotel chains differ in a significant way about how they handle this? If so, maybe we could insist on being told what the policy is, and then use that as a factor in which hotels we choose.
> 
>    Thanks,
>    Paul
>

---

From: Jakob Heitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 15:27:04 +0000

Well, I hate that policy.
I've never been "walked", but I would hate to be.

--
Jakob Heitz.

On Aug 15, 2013, at 8:22 AM, "Mary Barnes" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Jakob Heitz <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
Don't book more people than rooms.
[MB] The hotels book based on anticipated a specific number/percentage of no shows - that's standard business practice and is not unlike what the airlines do. Andrew Sullivan provided all the detail as to how it works based on his own firsthand experiences.   I do wonder if the numbers vary for conferences as to the average public.  I would think the IETF no show rate, for example, might be lower than the average no show rate.   My guess also is that they had more people from the other conference extend their stays.  As someone else noted, they aren't going to kick someone out of a room - that's guaranteed revenue. There's always a chance there will be no shows - flight delays, illness, etc.    [/MB]

If a booked person doesn't show, let the hotel charge that person a cancellation fee to cover revenue lost due to empty rooms.
[MB] They already do that - you can find any reservation has a cancel by date/time. If you don't cancel by then, they will charge you the first nights rate. [/MB]

--
Jakob Heitz.

On Aug 15, 2013, at 6:28 AM, "John R Levine" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

> John Levine, [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 15 Aug 2013 11:36:57 -0400

>> someone, and there's no way to force a person who's checked into a room out 
>> of it.
>
> Airlines usually offer people cash or other incentive to take a later flight. 
> So whilst there is no way to *force* someone out of a room, nothing says the 
> hotel can't buy them out of it.

I have never, ever, heard of a hotel doing that, and I read a fair amount 
of travel industry stuff.

Hotels hate walking people.  As others have noted, it's disruptive, it's 
expensive (they invariably provide a free night), and the customers 
dislike it.  They don't need a lot of extra incentive to prevent it.  It 
would be somewhat interesting to find out what happened at the IC, but I 
expect the answer will be three things went wrong at once in a way that is 
unlikely ever to happen again.

R's,
John

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 08:38:43 -0700

On 8/14/2013 11:34 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> trying to find rooms.

To clarify:

    1) The hotel should offset the inconvenience suffered by the guests. 
  This goes beyond paying for the room at the alternative hotel.

    2) There is a difference between hassling existing staff, versus 
hitting the bottom line.  Hassling the line staff is quite painful for 
them, but affects the folks who screwed up -- management -- little.  So 
when I refer to 'serious penalty', I don't mean making the life of line 
staff more painful.  (I'm not undervaluing your list, which I do 
appreciate as real and painful; it's simply not the 'venue' for the pain 
that I'm calling for.)

Paying for the guest's night at the alternative hotel shows up on the 
bottom line, of course, especially when it's on the scale of 25 rooms.

But, again, it has no compensatory value to the displaced and 
inconvenienced guest.  The cost that should be incurred should be to 
counteract the considerable inconvenience to the guest(s).  This is made 
a bit more interesting by the fact that business guests typically aren't 
paying for their room; so comp'ing them the cost of the room doesn't 
make /the guest/ better, it makes their company better.

> soft costs (roughly, money to another hotel or a dissatisfied guest).

Fair point.  What's missing is counteracting the inconvenience to the 
customer.

> economic agent.

As I said, it sounds as if our contract doesn't establish incentives 
well enough.  In this case that means making sure the hotel doesn't 
evaluate failure to honor the reservation in the way you describe.

d/

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 08:40:04 -0700

On 8/15/2013 6:25 AM, John R Levine wrote:
> By the way, the wifi on Dutch regional trains is amazing.  It is free,
> it works well, and it knows what train you're on so the startup page
> shows your upcoming stations with delay info updated in real time.

the east coast train between london and newcastle did that, as well.

d/

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 15 Aug 2013 11:41:02 -0400

> If a booked person doesn't show, let the hotel charge that person a cancellation fee to cover revenue lost due to empty rooms.

Um, you are not the first person ever to think about this issue.  They 
usually do charge a cancellation fee unless you pay the highest rack rate. 
Hotels are unlike airplanes in that they do not know in advance how long 
people will stay, and in many places they're not allowed to kick out a 
client who overstays, and I get the impression that overstays were the 
problem this time.

I've been walked, it's not a big deal.  You typically get a better room at 
a hotel within walking distance, for free, and the hotel staff will move 
your luggage back for you when you get unwalked if you ask them to.

Regards,

---

From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 17:40:30 +0000

On Aug 15, 2013, at 8:41 AM, John R Levine <[email-masked]> wrote:

> I've been walked, it's not a big deal.  You typically get a better room at a hotel within walking distance, for free, and the hotel staff will move your luggage back for you when you get unwalked if you ask them to.

And I. Similar experience. It would have been tough in City West in Dublin, because the alternate hotels were a distance away, but in most cases the alternate hotels that are also the obvious "walk-to" hotels and are near at hand. If there is anything to draw out of all this, I would think it is thinking seriously about Dave's comment re contracts, and the IAOC making sure that such backups in fact exist and are reasonable when it books a hotel.

And IETFers being a little more flexible. Sometimes I really scratch my head about discussions on the attendee lists...

---

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 13:53:04 -0400

> client who overstays, and I get the impression that overstays were the

In most common law countries/states, someone staying in a hotel room
is a tenant in possession and eviction proceedings can be difficult
and lengthy. But there are cases where the hotel industry has enough
clout to change the law. See, for example, Hawai'i Revised Statuses
Section 486K-8.

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/histatutes/2/26/486K/486K-8
It's an extraordinarily simple single sentence, but I guess you have
to read it in the context of the more lengthy definitions in
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/histatutes/2/26/486K/486K-1

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [email-masked]

> I've been walked, it's not a big deal.  You typically get a better room at a
> hotel within walking distance, for free, and the hotel staff will move your
> luggage back for you when you get unwalked if you ask them to.
>
>
> Regards,

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 14:04:24 -0400

> And IETFers being a little more flexible. Sometimes I really scratch my head about discussions on the attendee lists...

+1

---

From: Ole Jacobsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:13:20 -0700 (PDT)

> http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/histatutes/2/26/486K/486K-1

There is also the "innkeeper" law in many places which allows the 
guest to stay provided he pays. This comes in handy if you are
stranded in a place because of weather or other factors. Of course
"pays" can mean a number of different things, and the hotel is not
required to honor any special rate etc. I got stuck in Atlanta for
about 5 days following 9/11/2001 and excercised my right to stay
put.

Ole

---

From: "Charles E. Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 12:26:56 -0700

>> And IETFers being a little more flexible. Sometimes I really scratch my head about discussions on the attendee lists...

+1  --  but I wish the other hotels had great WiFi like the IETF hotel...

-- 
Regards,
Charlie P.

---

From: Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 16:09:12 -0400

On 08/15/2013 03:26 PM, Charles E. Perkins wrote:
>>> And IETFers being a little more flexible. Sometimes I really scratch 
>>> my head about discussions on the attendee lists...
>> +1
>>
>>
>

I paid 19EU/day the prior week in Bonn for ETSI/NFV.  Though the week 
before that for IEEE 802 in Geneva it was free (better have been for the 
price of that hotel...).  Yes, IETF networks are great and in the past 
when I had to fight Corporate travel/AP on staying at the venue hotel, I 
used that as part of the price justification.

---

From: "Carlos M. Martinez" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 17:28:10 -0300

My hotel was relatively cheap, good (even had A/C) and was less than
three blocks away from the IC. Only drawback: Internet was 12 euros per
day, and was sloooow.

What I ended up doing was buying a local SIM card with unlimited data
for 30 days (it was 29 euros), and I used my Android phone as access
point. Performance was better than the hotel wi-fi. Much better. And I
could also use data outdoors.

There were two caveats though: This 30-day offer was very convenient but
all setup instructions and the call center help were available only in
German. I got the kind help of a German friend of mine for getting it
running. And this offer was available online, I'm not sure if it was
possible to buy it from stores.

So, how could the IETF help? Maybe by pre-arranging a SIM card sales
booth at the event's registration. I'm not saying that the IETF needs to
pay for anything, I'm only saying that it could act as facilitator,
easing the process for all attendees who wish to buy a SIM card.

cheers!

~Carlos

---

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 15:54:29 -0500

> easing the process for all attendees who wish to buy a SIM card.
[MB] This reminds me of the good ole days in late 90's when there was a
table setup where folks could buy wifi cards. That was very helpful,
actually.[/MB]

---

From: "Carlos M. Martinez" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 18:06:10 -0300

Hello,
On 8/15/13 5:54 PM, Mary Barnes wrote:
>
> [MB] This reminds me of the good ole days in late 90's when there was
> a table setup where folks could buy wifi cards. That was very helpful,
> actually.[/MB]
There is previous art then. :-)

cheers!

~Carlos

---

From: Ole Jacobsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 14:15:54 -0700 (PDT)

It's certainly something that we encourage hosts/sponsors to set
up if possible (including making it a donated item), but it's
complicated by a lot of factors and requires additional resources
etc.

Ole (IAOC)

Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: [email-masked]  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
Skype: organdemo

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 15 Aug 2013 17:16:31 -0400

> +1  --  but I wish the other hotels had great WiFi like the IETF hotel...

The wifi at the Luetzow a block away was surprisingly good, quite adequate 
for VoIP calls back to the US.  Not a bad hotel for €50/night.

Regards,

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 14:27:59 -0700

> complicated by a lot of factors and requires additional resources

It's complicated if it's run by the IETF or even the host.

It's probably pretty simple if an independent vendor who provides such 
is merely allowed to have a table somewhere around IETF registration.

The premise is that SIM card rental has become a commodity business, as 
indeed it appears it has.

d/

---

From: Ole Jacobsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 14:38:19 -0700 (PDT)

> It's complicated if it's run by the IETF or even the host.

OLE: Right, well, I meant "facilitated by" the host/sponsor. It does
usually require some local coordination.

> 
> It's probably pretty simple if an independent vendor who provides such is
> merely allowed to have a table somewhere around IETF registration.

OLE: Yes, that's been done at other conferences (APRICOT for example) 
and I see no reason why we should not try to make it happen at the 
IETF, but local conditions for this "commodity" do vary and even the
independent vendor will want to know what to expect. After sleeping
at the desk for 3 days in New Delhi, I think the local vendor finally
gave up and went home (APRICOT 2012), and that was in a hotel which
had the worst WiFi setup I have ever experienced, ever.

> 
> The premise is that SIM card rental has become a commodity business, as indeed
> it appears it has.
> 
> d/
> 
> -- 
> Dave Crocker

Ole

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 22:05:39 -0400

> easing the process for all attendees who wish to buy a SIM card.

We've asked about this before, but it hasn't got traction.   It would probably turn into the new thing to complain about, so I'm not really surprised nobody's jumped on it.

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 22:07:07 -0400

On Aug 15, 2013, at 4:54 PM, Mary Barnes <[email-masked]> wrote:
> [MB] This reminds me of the good ole days in late 90's when there was a table setup where folks could buy wifi cards. That was very helpful, actually.[/MB] 

I still have my WaveLAN PCMCIA card in a box somewhere...

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 10:28:52 -0400

> We've asked about this before, but it hasn't got traction.   It would probably turn into the new thing to complain about, so I'm not really surprised nobody's jumped on it.
Since people are going to complain anyway, and offer solutions to 
problems that they don't understand, maybe we should nominate two or 
three "things to complain about" in advance of each IETF meeting.

For Vancouver in November, I think we should complain about the lack of 
air conditioning.

Keith

---

From: Derek Atkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 07:31:48 -0700

> For Vancouver in November, I think we should complain about the lack of 

That's sort of like complaining about Atlanta's lack of snow removal
equipment in the summer (or the winter)...

> Keith

-derek

---

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 10:47:59 -0400

I'm too hot at pretty much every meeting, so I promise to keep 
complaining aobut it. :-)

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 16 Aug 2013 11:12:18 -0400

> For Vancouver in November, I think we should complain about the lack of air 
> conditioning.

That's a good thought, but I plan to complain about the airport surcharge 
on the Canada Line, and to have a long argument about whether the 
faresaver tickets you can buy at the airport 7-11 are transferrable.

Regards,

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 08:57:53 -0700

On 8/15/2013 7:05 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> We've asked about this before, but it hasn't got traction.

Worthy topics often fail to get traction on an IETF list because 
discussion gets sidetracked, rather than because the topic lacks 
support.  Absent a core of active advocates, there is no source of 
pressure for pursuing the topic.

When a topic shows up repeatedly and mostly (or only) garners positive 
comments and isn't very difficult to pursue, we should press a bit 
harder for its adoption.

So here's a simple proposal that I will ask the rest of you to express 
support for:

      The IAOC should pursue having a local SIM card rental booth at 
future IETF meetings.  The card choices should represent locally 
competitive costs and services.

Yeah or nay?

d/

---

From: "Carlos M. Martinez" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 13:00:51 -0300

Hello!

> competitive costs and services.
Yeah!
> d/
~C.

---

From: Marc Petit-Huguenin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 09:08:03 -0700

On 08/16/2013 08:57 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> Worthy topics often fail to get traction on an IETF list because discussion
> gets sidetracked, rather than because the topic lacks support.  Absent a
> core of active advocates, there is no source of pressure for pursuing the
> topic.
> 
> comments and isn't very difficult to pursue, we should press a bit harder
> for its adoption.
> 
> The IAOC should pursue having a local SIM card rental booth at future IETF 
> meetings.  The card choices should represent locally competitive costs and 
> services.
> 
> 
> Yeah or nay?

Yeah.

- -- 
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Email: [email-masked]
Blog: http://blog.marc.petit-huguenin.org
Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug

---

From: Arturo Servin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 13:15:14 -0300

Yeah!

.as

---

From: Spencer Dawkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 11:19:18 -0500

> equipment in the summer (or the winter)...

Yeah, but the problem with waiting until we arrive onsite to decide what 
to complain about is that we're not really prepared, and railing on 
multiple topics lowers the quality of the complaints about all of the 
topics we're complaining about.

If we all decide now to complain about the same thing in Vancouver in 
November, we'll have *months* for people to compose rants.

Probably even as haikus. And then the IETF can sell the collection as 
poetry, and use the proceeds for the benefit of London participants 
(whether local or remote).

(Ducks)

Spencer

---

From: John Bradley <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 12:21:03 -0400

+1

John Bradley  |  Sr. Technical Architect
Ping Identity  |   www.pingidentity.com

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
O: +1 720.306.6055   M: +1 (303) 396-9546
Email: [email-masked]

Twitter: @ve7jtb
LinkedIn.com/in/v7jtb

On 2013-08-16, at 11:57 AM, Dave Crocker <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Worthy topics often fail to get traction on an IETF list because discussion gets sidetracked, rather than because the topic lacks support.  Absent a core of active advocates, there is no source of pressure for pursuing the topic.
> 
> When a topic shows up repeatedly and mostly (or only) garners positive comments and isn't very difficult to pursue, we should press a bit harder for its adoption.
> 
> So here's a simple proposal that I will ask the rest of you to express support for:
> 
>     The IAOC should pursue having a local SIM card rental booth at future IETF meetings.  The card choices should represent locally competitive costs and services.
> 
> 
> Yeah or nay?
> 
> d/
> 
> -- 
> Dave Crocker

---

From: Yoav Nir <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 16:26:28 +0000

Nay. If the host wants to arrange this, fine. But some countries have strange laws about this. Some phones work on some networks, but not on others. 

In Orlando, I found out that my phone would work on the Verizon network, but not AT&T. If the booth sold AT&T sims, we could have a nice, big discussion about why we didn't have Verizon and how I've wasted $X for a card that doesn't work.

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 12:33:24 -0400

>    The IAOC should pursue having a local SIM card rental booth at future IETF meetings.  The card choices should represent locally competitive costs and services.

I never cease to be amazed at IETF participants' willingness to demand more and more free services from event organizers.

That said, I would certainly find it useful to have cheap SIM cards easily available, but probably only if accompanied by English language support.  It wouldn't necessarily have to be at the conference site.  A pointer to a nearby store or one at the local airport would probably be sufficient.

---

From: Ted Hardie <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 09:39:22 -0700

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Spencer Dawkins <
[email-masked]> wrote:

> Probably even as haikus.

Hot winds of change blow
endless words past ears of stone
but the room stays cold.

(The topic was air conditioning, right?  Definitely air conditioning.)

Ted

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 16 Aug 2013 12:39:28 -0400

> In Orlando, I found out that my phone would work on the Verizon network, 
> but not AT&T. If the booth sold AT&T sims, we could have a nice, big 
> discussion about why we didn't have Verizon and how I've wasted $X for a 
> card that doesn't work.

North America is unusual in having two completely incompatible cell phone 
systems.  Verizon and Sprint in the US and Bell in Canada are CDMA, AT&T 
and T-Mobile in the US and Rogers and Telus in Canada are GSM, on 
different bands than GSM in most of the rest of the world (850 and 1900 
rather than 900 and 1800.)  Pelephone in Israel is one of the very few 
mobile carriers elsewhere that is compatible with American CDMA.

I think it's reasonable to expect people to know what kind of phone they 
have and what kind of networks it will work on before they go looking for 
SIMs.  In your case it's easy, since CDMA phones don't have SIMs.

Regards,

---

From: Tony Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 12:44:06 -0400

> Probably even as haikus.

now that is just a
challenge that an engineer
cannot e're resist

    Tony Hansen

---

From: Mikael Abrahamsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 18:54:21 +0200 (CEST)

> competitive costs and services.

Sounds good to me.

---

From: "Carlos M. Martinez" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 14:12:15 -0300

If one declined to participate, well, the organization can tell us about
that. We can take that into account when we vote with our wallets.

Also, no one is asking the IAOC to enter into exclusivity agreements
with anyone. If three, four companies might want to have booths there,
the more the merrier.

I also consider a reasonable expectation that IETF attendees are well
versed into the differences between CDMA and GSM/3G networks, as well as
the different bands in operation.

cheers!

~Carlos

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 10:51:13 -0700

Keith,

> That said, I would certainly find it useful to have cheap SIM cards easily available, but probably only if accompanied by English language support.  It wouldn't necessarily have to be at the confer…

Good points.

Personally, I doubt the economics would make selling SIMs on site worthwhile for an SIM vendor.  What percentage of attendees would do buy a SIM (requires an unlocked phone, motivation, etc.)?   Would that generate enough revenue for the seller to have someone on site for a day or two?

If the IAOC took this on, it would map into asking the Secretariat to organize this, which would map into increased costs for all of us.

I think would be better to collect information on where to buy a SIM on the meeting Wiki.   We clearly have some experts on this topic in the IETF.

Bob

---

From: "Carlos M. Martinez" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 15:07:18 -0300

Hello,

> I never cease to be amazed at IETF participants' willingness to demand more and more free services from event organizers.
No one is asking for anything for free here, what we are asking for is
some help from the local organizers, who are the ones who know the
ground they walk on, and for the IAOC to actually forward this need to
these organizers.
> That said, I would certainly find it useful to have cheap SIM cards easily available, but probably only if accompanied by English language support.  It wouldn't necessarily have to be at the confer…
I commented on this a few emails ago: this wouldn't have worked in
Germany, because of the lack of English-speaking support and for the
availability of convenient offers in stores. This is where the help of
the locals comes in.

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 14:38:52 -0400

> I think would be better to collect information on where to buy a SIM on the meeting Wiki.   We clearly have some experts on this topic in the IETF.

That seems like a good idea.

---

From: Ole Jacobsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 11:40:58 -0700 (PDT)

On Fri, 16 Aug 2013, John R Levine wrote:

> I think it's reasonable to expect people to know what kind of phone 
> they have and what kind of networks it will work on before they go 
> looking for SIMs.  In your case it's easy, since CDMA phones don't 
> have SIMs.
> 

Unless of course it is an iPhone. The (CDMA) Verizon iPhone5 for 
example, comes with a Verizon SIM card which may indeed be some kind 
of "dummy," but the important point is that you can insert any GSM SIM 
(allright, nano-SIM) card in the SIM slot since this iPhone ALSO 
supports all the GSM bands and is unlocked for GSM by default.

We can certainly ask local hosts/sponsors to help up identify SIM 
options (I wrote this up for the Hiroshima meeting for example), but I 
agree that it is probably unreasonable to expect someone to man a SIM 
desk for several days, unless of course a local carrier also happens 
to be meeting sponsors (ahem, DT :-), local regulations 
notwithstanding.

And in case anyone is wondering: There is really no such thing as LTE
Roaming, at least not yet.

Ole

---

From: Yoav Nir <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 19:41:58 +0000

On Aug 16, 2013, at 7:39 PM, John R Levine <[email-masked]> wrote:

> North America is unusual in having two completely incompatible cell phone systems.  Verizon and Sprint in the US and Bell in Canada are CDMA, AT&T and T-Mobile in the US and Rogers and Telus in Canada are GSM, on different bands than GSM in most of the rest of the world (850 and 1900 rather than 900 and 1800.)  Pelephone in Israel is one of the very few mobile carriers elsewhere that is compatible with American CDMA.

I think they've moved on from CDMA, and are now on the GSM and descendants bandwagon like the other operators. Anyway, my phone definitely has a SIM and I'm not using Pelephone.

> I think it's reasonable to expect people to know what kind of phone they have and what kind of networks it will work on before they go looking for SIMs.  In your case it's easy, since CDMA phones don't have SIMs.

I got a "travel to the US" phone from work with an AT&T SIM. I thought I could transfer that SIM to my phone and use that. When that didn't work, I moved the AT&T SIM back to the work phone, and put my regular (Orange) SIM card back in my phone. It happily joined the Verizon network. Roaming charges being what they are, I disabled that immediately.

It turns out that my Nokia 920 supports bands that are used in Israel and on Verizon, but not on AT&T. This is not something that I could have known beforehand, as there are phones with the exact same model number that do work on AT&T, though I don't know if there are such phones that work on both.

Yoav

---

From: "Charles E. Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 13:59:04 -0700

Hello Ole,

> Roaming, at least not yet.

That's because they won't support Mobile IP.

At least not yet.

-- 
Regards,
Charlie P.

---

From: Kevin Lahey <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 15:12:20 -0700

> availability of convenient offers in stores. This is where the help of

I had no problem getting a SIM good for 500MB/month for €10 at a shop down the street from my hotel.  The guy at the counter was happy to speak English (rather than suffering with my college German), and was super-helpful.  I was feeling kind of ill, or I would've tried harder to find the slightly better deals mentioned on this list for text and voice as well at the same price.

OTOH, I could imagine that getting a SIM in, say, Orlando, might've been a bit more complex.

Kevin
[email-masked]

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 16 Aug 2013 18:34:52 -0400

> OTOH, I could imagine that getting a SIM in, say, Orlando, might've been a bit more complex.

Well, getting anything in Orlando is a pain.  There's an Airport Wireless 
store in the airport which may have SIMs, and a couple of Cellphone Outlet 
stores, one a mile north of the Caribe, one a mile south.

Perhaps we should have a new criterion that venues should be within 
walking distance of a phone store, as well as restaurants, grocery stores 
with everything-free food, and so forth.

Unhelpfully,
John

---

From: "Larry Kreeger (kreeger)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 22:34:59 +0000

Yeah

On 8/16/13 8:57 AM, "Dave Crocker" <[email-masked]> wrote:

>_

---

From: Raitme Citterio <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 18:06:49 -0430

good idea for next ietf

Raitme Citterio

2013/8/16 John R Levine <[email-masked]>

> ______________________________**_________________
> 87attendees mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/87attendees<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/87attendees>
>

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 16 Aug 2013 18:45:00 -0400

There's a Tbooth wireless store at 1024 Robson St, roughly halfway between 
the Hyatt and the Sheraton.  They have products from a variety of 
carriers, see http://www.tboothwireless.ca/

There's also a Rogers dealer at 595 Burrard St, about 1/2 block north of 
the Hyatt.  Rogers is the dominant GSM carrier in Canada.

Regards,

---

From: "Larry Kreeger (kreeger)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 23:06:53 +0000

Last time in Vancouver, I picked up a Fido SIM card at Pepper Wireless in
the Royal Centre which is right next door to the Hyatt.  You can get there
without getting wet (assuming it will be raining in November).  I think I
had to buy the SIM for $10 and then add another $10 in credits to buy data
access.  I have no idea if this is a good deal or not.

 - Larry

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 16 Aug 2013 20:19:32 -0400

> access.  I have no idea if this is a good deal or not.

Canadian mobile service is fairly expensive, so that's a good deal, 
particularly if the $10 was enough to last all week.

Regards,

---

From: "Mishra, Sanjay" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 20:21:04 -0400

I guess good or bad depends on what was your usage experience?

Thanks
Sanjay

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Larry Kreeger (kreeger)
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 7:07 PM
To: John R Levine; 87 attendees
Subject: Re: [87attendees] SIMs in Vancouver

Last time in Vancouver, I picked up a Fido SIM card at Pepper Wireless in the Royal Centre which is right next door to the Hyatt.  You can get there without getting wet (assuming it will be raining in November).  I think I had to buy the SIM for $10 and then add another $10 in credits to buy data access.  I have no idea if this is a good deal or not.

 - Larry

On 8/16/13 3:45 PM, "John R Levine" <[email-masked]> wrote:

>There's a Tbooth wireless store at 1024 Robson St, roughly halfway 
>between the Hyatt and the Sheraton.  They have products from a variety 
>of carriers, see http://www.tboothwireless.ca/
>
>There's also a Rogers dealer at 595 Burrard St, about 1/2 block north 
>of the Hyatt.  Rogers is the dominant GSM carrier in Canada.
>
>Regards,
>John Levine, [email-masked], Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY "I 
>dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly.

---

From: "Larry Kreeger (kreeger)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 00:57:57 +0000

Data on Fido is $1 for 10MB (24 hour expiration) or $5 for 60MB (7 day
expiration).  This was enough for me (it helps if you cache your google
maps in offline mode first).  It was the best deal I saw at the time, but
times change! :-)

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 10:07:44 +0900

> I had no problem getting a SIM good for 500MB/month for €10 at a shop
> down the street from my hotel.  The guy at the counter was happy to
> speak English (rather than suffering with my college German), and was
> super-helpful.

the stores will also perform the arcane activation rituals for you,
which is exceedingly helpful.  in berlin, i thought sim and top-up
stores were scarce until i realized that every tabac and newsstand did
it.

contest for the day: in what venues might there _not_ be stores within a
short walk?  [ and don't try the poorer economies.  there the stores are
even more plentiful and will even unlock your iphone for you. ]

the ietf - where we build mountains.  out of molehills.

randy

---

From: "Olle E. Johansson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 10:42:45 +0200

16 aug 2013 kl. 18:19 skrev Spencer Dawkins <[email-masked]>:

> Yeah, but the problem with waiting until we arrive onsite to decide what to complain about is that we're not really prepared, and railing on multiple topics lowers the quality of the complaints about all of the topics we're complaining about.
> 
> If we all decide now to complain about the same thing in Vancouver in November, we'll have *months* for people to compose rants.
> 
> Probably even as haikus. And then the IETF can sell the collection as poetry, and use the proceeds for the benefit of London participants (whether local or remote).

T-shirts and stickers too. Don't forget the merchandise oppurtunity if we can agree in time.

/O

---

From: Spencer Dawkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 06:33:51 -0500

> T-shirts and stickers too. Don't forget the merchandise oppurtunity if we can agree in time.

I had forgotten completely! If this keeps up, ISOC will be able to pay 
all of us to attend as Cost of Goods Sold :-)

And all we have to do is agree on something by a specific date. Oh, wait ...

Spencer

---

From: Scott Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 07:42:39 -0400

Could we possibly have a "problems" mailing list separate from the
"attendees" mailing list?

---

From: Eric McMurry <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 08:47:02 -0500

so, I sign up for the attendees list when I'm an attendee, and I sign up for the problems list when I'm a ....

On Aug 17, 2013, at 6:42 , Scott Brim <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Could we possibly have a "problems" mailing list separate from the "attendees" mailing list?   _______________________________________________
> 87attendees mailing list
> [email-masked]

---

From: Samuel Weiler <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 09:54:21 -0400 (EDT)

> cancellation fee to cover revenue lost due to empty rooms.

Different attendees have different takes on this.  Personally, I 
prefer generous cancel terms, and I will happily accept the risk of 
being walked (and getting a free room) as the cost of that.  I have 
also deliberately avoiding booking at the meeting rate when cancel 
terms were too nasty.

I think there is merit in Andrew Sullivan's suggestion of letting us 
self-select: have the secretariat collect, as part of registration, a 
one-bit preference for "happiness to be given a free room at another 
hotel" and provide that list to the hotel(s) if needed.

-- Sam

---

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 13:18:43 -0500

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Bob Hinden <[email-masked]> wrote:

> >>   The IAOC should pursue having a local SIM card rental booth at future
> IETF meetings.  The card choices should represent locally competitive costs
> and services.
> >
> > I never cease to be amazed at IETF participants' willingness to demand
> more and more free services from event organizers.
>
>
> > That said, I would certainly find it useful to have cheap SIM cards
> easily available, but probably only if accompanied by English language
> support.  It wouldn't necessarily have to be at the conference site.  A
> pointer to a nearby store or one at the local airport would probably be
> sufficient.
>
> Good points.
>
> Personally, I doubt the economics would make selling SIMs on site
> worthwhile for an SIM vendor.  What percentage of attendees would do buy a
> SIM (requires an unlocked phone, motivation, etc.)?   Would that generate
> enough revenue for the seller to have someone on site for a day or two?
>
[MB] We don't have answers to these questions because we haven't tried it.
 It would seem to be something easy to try in Vancouver since apparently
there are several shops nearby. Asking one or two of those vendors to send
someone to spend Sunday afternoon and Monday maybe wouldn't seem to be too
much of a burden for them and if they aren't getting decent business, they
can just leave. /MB]

>
> If the IAOC took this on, it would map into asking the Secretariat to
> organize this, which would map into increased costs for all of us.
>
[MB] So I guess your response is that this isn't something the IAOC is
willing to consider despite the fact that there were several +1s that it
might be helpful? I agree 100% that the secretariat already does a lot of
work at IETF meetings.   And, we have continued to add to that burden over
the years with newcomer's meet 'n greet, Bits 'n bytes, etc.  So, it would
be good I think to evaluate the pros and cons before totally dismissing
this suggestion.  Much in the same way that Bits 'n Bytes was started as a
trial as it was deemed something that might benefit the community, I would
think trying out this idea for one or two meetings is not unreasonable.
[/MB]

>
> I think would be better to collect information on where to buy a SIM on
> the meeting Wiki.   We clearly have some experts on this topic in the IETF.
>
[MB] That information would be helpful.  Some of the concerns raised,
however, were around cases where the IETF attendees did not speak the local
language While the usual response is that many people in European cities,
for example, speak English, not all IETF participants have English as a
first language.   So, while knowing where the shop is can be helpful, it
doesn't solve the problem of being able to communicate what one wants and
needs, and getting a fair price.   Also, my understanding was the folks
that would benefit the most were those that weren't staying at the main
IETF hotels with a high quality Internet connection.  We all know that
there are a lot of crappy hotel networks out there and that a good network
is imperative for all of us in getting our work done. So, making it a
little easier for folks to get these SIM cards would seem to be a good
thing to me and not an unreasonable service to ask the IAOC to work with
the secretariat in obtaining.   The other option of course would be for the
"experts on this topic" to be willing to go with the folks that are not
experts and that don't speak the local language to assist them in their
purchase.    [/MB]

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 08:33:19 -0700

Mary,

Just to be clear, I was speaking for myself ("Personally").  I was not speaking for the IAOC.

Bob

On Aug 17, 2013, at 11:18 AM, Mary Barnes <[email-masked]> wrote:

> [MB] We don't have answers to these questions because we haven't tried it.  It would seem to be something easy to try in Vancouver since apparently there are several shops nearby. Asking one or two of those vendors to send someone to spend Sunday afternoon and Monday maybe wouldn't seem to be too much of a burden for them and if they aren't getting decent business, they can just leave. /MB] 
> 
> [MB] So I guess your response is that this isn't something the IAOC is willing to consider despite the fact that there were several +1s that it might be helpful? I agree 100% that the secretariat already does a lot of work at IETF meetings.   And, we have continued to add to that burden over the years with newcomer's meet 'n greet, Bits 'n bytes, etc.  So, it would be good I think to evaluate the pros and cons before totally dismissing this suggestion.  Much in the same way that Bits 'n Bytes was started as a trial as it was deemed something that might benefit the community, I would think trying out this idea for one or two meetings is not unreasonable. [/MB]
> 
> [MB] That information would be helpful.  Some of the concerns raised, however, were around cases where the IETF attendees did not speak the local language While the usual response is that many people in European cities, for example, speak English, not all IETF participants have English as a first language.   So, while knowing where the shop is can be helpful, it doesn't solve the problem of being able to communicate what one wants and needs, and getting a fair price.   Also, my understanding was the folks that would benefit the most were those that weren't staying at the main IETF hotels with a high quality Internet connection.  We all know that there are a lot of crappy hotel networks out there and that a good network is imperative for all of us in getting our work done. So, making it a little easier for folks to get these SIM cards would seem to be a good thing to me and not an unreasonable service to ask the IAOC to work with the secretariat in obtaining.   The other option of course would be for the "experts on this topic" to be willing to go with the folks that are not experts and that don't speak the local language to assist them in their purchase.    [/MB]
> 
> Bob
> 
> 
> 
> 
>