Subject: suggestion for the next IETFs

From: "Hosnieh Rafiee" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:16:11 +0100

Hello,

I have a suggestion for IETF meetings in the US and Canada. Unfortunately
sometimes a visa processing (to Canada and the US) might take 2 to 3 months.
Since invitation letters are usually necessary components to apply for a
visa,  sometimes the time for visa processing is not enough for planning for
this trip (reservation, buying a ticket, etc.)
Each IETF is usually every 6 months. I do not know whether there is any
possibility to change the start of registration date that at least there is
minimum 3 complete months before the IETF meeting (also after considering
possibility delay in opening registration, etc.)

Thanks,
Best,
Hosnieh
P.S. This of course applies to non US citizen

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 14:50:11 -0400

Hosnieh Rafiee <[email-masked]> wrote:
    > I have a suggestion for IETF meetings in the US and
    > Canada. Unfortunately sometimes a visa processing (to Canada and the
    > US) might take 2 to 3 months.  Since invitation letters are usually
    > necessary components to apply for a visa, sometimes the time for visa
    > processing is not enough for planning for this trip (reservation,
    > buying a ticket, etc.)  Each IETF is usually every 6 months. I do not
    > know whether there is any possibility to change the start of
    > registration date that at least there is minimum 3 complete months
    > before the IETF meeting (also after considering possibility delay in
    > opening registration, etc.)

So, you are saying that you need registration to open earlier so that one can
get the invitation letter earlier, so that the visa process can start
earlier?

--
Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

---

From: "Hosnieh Rafiee" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:58:00 +0100

earlier?

Yes

---

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 11:07:56 +0100

Folks,

Maybe we should start favor countries where it is easier to get visa for
everybody?

/Loa

-- 

Loa Andersson                        email: [email-masked]
Senior MPLS Expert                          [email-masked]
Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64

---

From: Yoav Nir <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:25:47 +0200

Define “everybody”

Canada is very convenient for most people. AFAIK Americans, Europeans, even Israelis can enter without a visa. But for Indian (among others) citizens living in the US there is a real issue with the Canadian consulates in the US not processing visa applications from non-US citizens.  You’ll find issues with pretty much every country. Even EU countries require visas for visitors from China, India, African countries, Arab countries and parts of latin America. 

About 50% of our participants come from North America. Disqualifying the US and Canada would be grossly problematic. Early registration and LOI is the better avenue than trying to pick the country with the laxest immigration policy.

Yoav

> On Oct 27, 2014, at 12:07 PM, Loa Andersson <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Folks,
>

---

From: Dave Cridland <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 10:29:25 +0000

On 27 October 2014 10:25, Yoav Nir <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Define “everybody”
>
> Canada is very convenient for most people. AFAIK Americans, Europeans,
> even Israelis can enter without a visa. But for Indian (among others)
> citizens living in the US there is a real issue with the Canadian
> consulates in the US not processing visa applications from non-US
> citizens.  You’ll find issues with pretty much every country. Even EU
> countries require visas for visitors from China, India, African countries,
> Arab countries and parts of latin America.
>
> About 50% of our participants come from North America. Disqualifying the
> US and Canada would be grossly problematic. Early registration and LOI is
> the better avenue than trying to pick the country with the laxest
> immigration policy.
>

All agreed, but we currently pick locations based on geographic locality to
participants - maybe picking them based on visa availability for
participants might be more useful?

Dave.

---

From: Ole Jacobsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 04:51:23 -0700 (PDT)

Dave,
 
> All agreed, but we currently pick locations based on geographic 
> locality to participants - maybe picking them based on visa 
> availability for participants might be more useful?
> 
> Dave.
> 

As Yaov says, this really depends on "participants." Malaysia would be 
a great location for an IETF meeting (cheap, well-connected by air, 
etc), but Yaov would have some real challenges in getting a visa, it 
would be possible, but require special procedures.

And "visa availability" is sadly a highly dynamic and unpredictable
variable. We had one IETF meeting  a couple of years ago where 77
[potential] attendees from China asked for invitation letters and
only 27 were able to get a visa in time. We have no idea what it
was at the time that made this [not] happen, nor can we predict the
decision time for US visas.

There probably ARE places in the world that would allow "everyone"
to attend, but it's not at all clear we would find a suitable venue
and even less clear the community would agree on the definition
of "suitable". Remember, this is a community who cannot agree on
the definition of "approximately" :-)

Ole

Ole J. Jacobsen 
Editor and Publisher
The Internet Protocol Journal
Office: +1 415-550-9433
Cell:   +1 415-370-4628
docomo: (090) 3337-9311
Orange UK: +44 7805 977889
Web: protocoljournal.org
E-mail: [email-masked]
E-mail: [email-masked]
Skype: organdemo

---

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 13:16:41 +0100

Well,

We know that the Oslo and Stockholm is reasonably quick on visas and have the venues. I think that what is asked for is that ease of getting a visa should be included as one criteria of the same importance as the geography. 

/Loa

Sent from my iPhone

> On 27 okt 2014, at 12:51, Ole Jacobsen <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Dave,
>

---

From: "John Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 27 Oct 2014 21:36:20 -0000

>participants might be more useful?

I doubt that's going to be a productive route.  For people who live in
the US, Canada, EU, Japan, Australia, and NZ, all those countries
allow citizens of all of the others to travel without a visa,
requiring at most an online un-visa (US and Australia.)  Beyond that,
the rules are all over the place.  The US has soms unfortunate rules
(good luck if you have a Cuban or Iranian passport) but even a normal
visa often takes months if the consulate in the visitor's country is
backed up.  We might find a small country that has relaxed visa rules,
but was more expensive to get to, the overall number of people who
came might well be less.

Opening the registration earlier seems like something that wouldn't be
very hard to do, and would be a boon to people who need visas.  By way
of comparison, ICANN's next meeting is in February, and the
registration has been open for a couple of weeks.

R's,
John

PS: Wait until you see what the un-visa for Argentina involves.

---

From: Nico Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 17:23:16 -0500

> PS: Wait until you see what the un-visa for Argentina involves.

Spoiler alert: money.

---

From: Hosnieh Rafiee <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 08:01:04 +0000

: Re: earlier registration, suggestion for the next IETFs
> the US, Canada, EU, Japan, Australia, and NZ, all those countries allow
> citizens of all of the others to travel without a visa, requiring at
> most an online un-visa (US and Australia.)  Beyond that, the rules are
> all over the place.  The US has soms unfortunate rules (good luck if
> you have a Cuban or Iranian passport) but even a normal visa often
> takes months if the consulate in the visitor's country is backed up.
> We might find a small country that has relaxed visa rules, but was more
> expensive to get to, the overall number of people who came might well
> be less.
> 

I also think that opening the registration earlier would be easier than thinking about changing location with less visa limitation such as countries like Turkey, Indonesia, Malaysia, etc.

Thanks,
Best,
Hosnieh

---

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:34:40 +0100

John,

> PS: Wait until you see what the un-visa for Argentina involves.

How is it un-productive to chose a place where we know everyone will
get a visa on time, as compared to a place where we know that a
substantial part of the participants won't?

Not so much the rules, but the practice of the authorities.

/Loa

--

---

From: Jelte Jansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:55:58 +0100

On 10/27/2014 10:36 PM, John Levine wrote:
> requiring at most an online un-visa (US and Australia.)

For *most* of them. Those un-visa rules have nice little extra text that
they can be suspended for any reason. So for those of us who happened to
run into an immigration officer that was having a bad day, the waiver
program doesn't apply anymore. Getting a visa after that is expensive,
and takes a lot of time and effort (order of months, multiple extensive
forms, and a live interview beforehand, as well as multiple extra checks
when actually traveling). Getting a visa for China, to name something,
has turned out to be way simpler.

I realize that this can happen in any country, and that I am an
exception, though I hear it happening more and more often in the US.

I do not get the opportunity to visit every IETF anymore, but those that
require travel to or through the US are certainly the first to drop off
the list.

BTW, I am not advocating locations are picked differently, and I do
think at least a third of the meetings should be in or near the US. But
please realize that even for Europeans (and non-us americans, btw), it
can be pretty difficult to get over there.

Jelte

---

From: Allison Mankin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 05:40:53 -0700

​Hosnieh,

I think you have put your finger on something - if the current amount of
time is too short for visas to be obtained, then one solution is to provide
invitation letters earlier, so there's more lead tmie.

Adding a question for the IAOC - what are options for making invitation
letters available further ahead of a meeting?

Best,

Allison

---

From: Ray Pelletier <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 08:57:04 -0400

On Oct 28, 2014, at 8:40 AM, Allison Mankin <[email-masked]> wrote:

> ​Hosnieh,
> 
> I think you have put your finger on something - if the current amount of time is too short for visas to be obtained, then one solution is to provide invitation letters earlier, so there's more lead tmie.
> 
> Adding a question for the IAOC - what are options for making invitation letters available further ahead of a meeting?  

We had in the past for LOIs from the IETF and for some unknown reason the page to do so
is not linked where it is accessible.

The page is being reviewed and expected to return soon.

Ray

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 10:26:46 -0700

On 10/28/2014 5:57 AM, Ray Pelletier wrote:
>>
>> I think you have put your finger on something - if the current amount
>> of time is too short for visas to be obtained, then one solution is to
>> provide invitation letters earlier, so there's more lead tmie.
>>
>> Adding a question for the IAOC - what are options for making
>> invitation letters available further ahead of a meeting?  
> 

The IAOC moved towards posting basic -- such as city and I believe main
hotel -- much earlier than when registration is opened.

It sounds as if adding the visa-related information to the earliest
announcement of venue details would make sense.

If I recall, the target date for that early announcement is roughly 12
months ahead of the event?

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

---

From: "John Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 28 Oct 2014 18:00:23 -0000

>announcement of venue details would make sense.

As I understand it, people need to be able to register and get a
letter of invitation to send in with their visa application.  The
LOI is already completely automated, so this still feels like a
fairly minor software tweak to allow it to happen earlier.

R's,
John

---

From: Ray Pelletier <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 09:24:42 -0400

Allison,

> Adding a question for the IAOC - what are options for making invitation letters available further ahead of a meeting?  

We have had a page online where individuals could request a Letter of Invitation
for meetings well in advance of the meeting.  For some reason the link to it 
vanished from a Meetings page, but AMS is working to get it restored.

For an advance LOI one had to meet one of the following criteria:

Author of a -01 or above version Internet Draft
Author of Working Group Internet Draft
Author of an RFC
Attended an IETF meeting since IETF 65

I expect this will be restored this week.

Ray

---

From: Yoav Nir <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 16:13:20 +0200

> On Oct 30, 2014, at 3:24 PM, Ray Pelletier <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Allison,
> 
> On Oct 28, 2014, at 8:40 AM, Allison Mankin <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
> 
>> ​Hosnieh,
>> 

Hey! I’m all four of these. Can we add WG Chair / Secretary to the list?

Also, I’m wondering why LOIs are available to anyone who has registered (even if they haven’t paid yet, so it’s easy and free to cancel), but is reserved for “serious” people a long time in advance/

Yoav

---

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 10:58:21 -0400

Note that this is sometimes restricted by national law. I believe if
the IETF were to meet in Switzerland, it would be illegal to issue a
Letter to be used as the basis for a visa application to anyone who
has not already actually paid their registration fee for the meeting.

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

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Ray Pelletier <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Hosnieh,

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 20:58:41 -0700

Hi Hosnieh,

I don't think that the USA embassy do request that attendees must be
registered, but the request is a letter from the organisation or the
event, because they undersatnd that you may loose money if they refuse
visa application. I have the same problem related to USA visa process,
so usually I always comment that IETF should try to do most of its
meetings outside the USA (I prefer if there is a most popular place,
to have our most meetings in London) but that may not be suitable
because we also have many participants from USA which push for
meetings in the North America region. I think the canadian visa is
with easier process. However, I support your suggestion related to
IETF meetings in USA because the IETF is not owned by USA but IETF is
a world organisation.

 Another suggestion is that we can get letter of support from the IETF
chair after meeting/submitting-ID with IETF with in IETF meetings
outside north america, so the letter mentioned that you are attending
IETF meeting outside the USA and/or you are doing work with IETF, so
the IETF is recommending that you attend and register.

Thanks

AB

IETF participant from Africa (started from 2012)

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 21:07:58 -0700

Hi Donald,

I disagree because IETF is benefiting from the world's participants
work and is working for better diversity. The submission of ID into
the IETF is a registeration of business with in the IETF.

If the IETF is based on remote participation and that it accepts work
from all the world, then it should be legal by law or business. IMHO,
The IETF only should issue letters for registered people or
participants with an ID submitted.

AB

IETF participant from Africa

> has not already actually paid their registration fee for the meeting.

In switzerland it is important that there is business between the
attendee and the organiser. therefore, the attendee should
submit/register his/her work into the IETF.