Subject: RE: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:35:59 -0700

How about adding that the mean outdoor temperature at the time of the
year the meeting is being held should be above 0 degrees Centigrade? 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On 
> Behalf Of JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
> Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 6:30 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I've not seen the announcement yet, but it has been published:
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-palet-ietf-meeting-v
> enue-selection
> -criteria-00.txt
> 
> I hope we have a lot of comments and constructive inputs !
> 
> Remember, this document defines WHERE our next meeting will 
> happen and under what conditions those venues are selected, 
> so is important for all of us, right ?
> 
> Regards,
> Jordi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ************************************
> The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org
> 
> Barcelona 2005 Global IPv6 Summit
> Information available at:
> http://www.ipv6-es.com
> 
> This electronic message contains information which may be 
> privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be 
> for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not 
> the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, 
> distribution or use of the contents of this information, 
> including attached files, is prohibited.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Ole Jacobsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:36:25 -0700 (PDT)

> year the meeting is being held should be above 0 degrees Centigrade? 

Why?

---

From: Elwyn Davies <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:12:55 +0100

>>year the meeting is being held should be above 0 degrees Centigrade? 
There is some logic in this.. Participants need to be able to get from 
airport to hotel to venue on foot/public transport without needing to 
bring excessive personal protection gear that they might not otherwise 
own, or experiencing heat stroke because they aren't used to the 
temperature/humidity (oh, and touristing before/after isn't much fun 
either).

Another related criterion is that the expected weather is not going to 
produce a high risk of transport disruption.. southern USA in the 
hurricane season???  continental Canada in December???  Asia in the 
monsoon season??? whereever in the peak holiday influx season for that 
region???

More importantly, the venue must be able to maintain a sensible 
temperature/humidity in the conference rooms (20-23 deg  C, 50% Relative 
Humidity).  Remember that the side effect of allowing 80% of people to 
plug in their laptops is that each of them may be dissipating an extra 
150-200 watts of heat into the room over and above what the human body 
does.  This is actually more than doubling the heat load into the room, 
and cooling systems may not be able to cope - the IETF is an unusual 
body and it imposes cruel and unusual punishment on cooling systems.  
Sitting for a week in excessively warm and humid rooms is not pleasant 
(working efficiency falls off even at 26C).  For example, the Paris 
meeting turned out ok because the outside temperature dropped right 
about when the actual conference began, but I was at an Interop event in 
the same building the previous week when the temperatures were much 
higher, and being in one of the smaller rooms with lots of bodies and 
more computers was unpleasant.. the cooling just wasn't coping.   My 
mind has blanked out the location, but we had a very unpleasant week in 
a US venue two or three years ago when the cooling couldn't cope.
Reference:
http://ergo.human.cornell.edu/studentdownloads/DEA350notes/Thermal/thcomnotes1.html
http://ergo.human.cornell.edu/studentdownloads/DEA350notes/Thermal/thcomnotes2.html
http://ergo.human.cornell.edu/studentdownloads/DEA350notes/Thermal/thcondnotes.html

Other health risks: Would participants need vaccinations before 
attending?  Is it in a malaria risk area?  Are there other infectious 
disease hazards or nuisances - e.g., West Nile fever, Lyme disease, 
Scottish Highland midges.  Even if visas are not required are there any 
health checks at immigration?

The airport (and/or other wide area transport links) need to have 
adequate capacity and decent connections.. probably not an issue if the 
venue is sufficiently large but worth checking.

The criteria say nothing about accessibility for the differently able.

There is also the matter of break time refreshment provision.. 
succouring 1300 thirsty, half-starved nerds (sorry, IETFers) two or 
three times a day at a reasonable cost can be a challenge.

You need to differentiate the technical requirements of the venue from 
what the network providers need to do.... there are some fuzzy edges 
here e.g., the WAN links

Editorial note: You should flag up that continental European conventions 
are in use for numbers.

Regards,
Elwyn

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 12:46:13 +0300

> temperature/humidity (oh, and touristing before/after isn't much fun 

Lets just not specify anything here. Its not like the secretariat
would be blindly executing our rules and ending up selecting
the Antarctica for the next IETF location. (They wouldn't because
the hotel capacity is insufficient.) In other places, you can
probably manage short exposure to the elements, particularly
if you happen to check beforehand which part of the world you
are going to. And yes, this might mean investment to protective
gear such as a hat, jacket or a tube of SPF 40. Or a taxi ride.

And I've found that touristing is more interesting in extreme
conditions.

> temperature/humidity in the conference rooms (20-23 deg  C, 50% 
> Relative Humidity). 

This is more important. I feel that the rooms are mostly too cold
(probably tuned for business suits, not t-shirts).

> Scottish Highland midges.  Even if visas are not required are there 
> any health checks at immigration?

Its really better that people check with their own doctors about this.
I at least check before "weird" trips from our local clinique what the
vaccination recommendations are.

> The criteria say nothing about accessibility for the differently able.

This should be a requirement.

> Editorial note: You should flag up that continental European 
> conventions are in use for numbers.

What numbers?

--Jari

---

From: Elwyn Davies <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:34:43 +0100

Jari Arkko wrote:

> Elwyn Davies wrote:
>
>> There is some logic in this.. Participants need to be able to get 
>> from airport to hotel to venue on foot/public transport without 
>> needing to bring excessive personal protection gear that they might 
>> not otherwise own, or experiencing heat stroke because they aren't 
>> used to the temperature/humidity (oh, and touristing before/after 
>> isn't much fun either).
>
>

You don't want exact rules..but preferring a 'temperate' temperature 
range or avoiding likely real extremes is a criterion for choosing one 
veue over another.

> (probably tuned for business suits, not t-shirts).

Interesting.. I have not yet found anything cooler than nicely 
comfortable for me - mostly they are far too hot for my taste but 
doubtless that might be something to do with BMI!  Seriously, the 
population of laptops (plus the need for inter-seat spacing to 
accomodate laptop use) may mean that room sizes need to be larger than 
the nominal capacities that venues quote.  It would probably be sensible 
to quote the space per participant that we expect in meeting rooms and 
maybe something about chair layouts.

> vaccination recommendations are.

Absolutely, but choosing a venue where most people (e.g.) ought to be 
popping malaria prevention pills is something that needs to be thought 
about.. it means participants need more advance planning and last minute 
decisions might not be possible (as with visas).

>> conventions are in use for numbers.

e.g., I take it that 1.300 means we average 13e2 rather than 13e-1 
participants.

Regards,
Elwyn

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:05:54 -0400

>>>>> "Hallam-Baker," == Hallam-Baker, Phillip <[email-masked]> writes:

    Hallam-Baker,> How about adding that the mean outdoor temperature
    Hallam-Baker,> at the time of the year the meeting is being held
    Hallam-Baker,> should be above 0 degrees Centigrade?

I'd rather not adopt this requirement.

---

From: "Marshall Eubanks" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:51:20 -0400

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:05:54 -0400
> I'd rather not adopt this requirement.

I would agree. 

Regards
Marshall Eubanks

---

From: Joe Abley <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 12:38:26 -0400

> year the meeting is being held should be above 0 degrees Centigrade?

References to climate conditions outside the meeting venue have no  
place in this document, in my opinion; they belong in the orthogonal  
realm of holiday planning.

However, in the interests of community education, perhaps some  
operational data on the effect of cold winter climates on  
mollycoddled, temperate-dwelling wimps might be instructive.

Test subject was born and partially raised in the north island of New  
Zealand, and now lives in south-western Ontario, Canada. This is by  
no means a cold place by Canadian standards; mean minimum daily  
temperatures in January and February are only -10C, and it never  
normally gets much colder than about -25C (although it feels  
substantially colder if it's windy).

Extensive climate-related fear was confirmed to exist in the test  
subject before moving to Canada, together with mild incomprehension  
at large negative numbers purporting to represent outside air  
temperature.

However, subsequent experimentation suggests that the magic boundary  
between cold and "you need proper clothing or you will get injured"  
for non-trivial periods of time spent outside is somewhere around  
-15C. For brief trips outside (house to car, car to office) the  
boundary is much lower, perhaps around -25C.

Test subject also had occasion to fly from Auckland to Halifax, Nova  
Scotia in early March, (i.e. from southern summer to northern winter)  
where he got off the plane wearing a t-shirt, sandals and shorts.  
Sandals are no longer recommended for negotiation of snow-covered  
walking surfaces, and t-shirts are now considered insufficient  
protection against blowing snow. For the experimental record, however  
subject did not die; nor did he lose any limbs or digits. He got a  
lot of hard stares from people, though. More so than usual, even.

Joe

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:54:56 +0200

> realm of holiday planning.

Not entirely so. For example, there are clearly places we would
avoid during hurricane season.

> operational data on the effect of cold winter climates on  mollycoddled, 
> temperate-dwelling wimps might be instructive.

Thanks for the implementation report.

     Brian

---

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:05:59 -0700

Hi all,

I'm trying to summarize and comment the different threads that have received
some input on this document during the last days.

This is the 1st thread (others to follow), related to weather conditions for
the venue.

I think, reading the different comments, the conclusion is that:

1) Outdoor temperature during the meeting above 0 degrees Centigrade and
below 40.

2) Expected weather is not going to produce a high risk of transport
disruption (for example hurricanes, typhoons, etc.).

3) The venue must be able to maintain a sensible temperature/humidity in the
conference rooms and meeting areas in general (20-23 deg. C, 50% relative
humidity). Specially important for the venue cooling system to consider the
side effect of 80% of people plugging-in their laptops dissipating an extra
150-200 watts of heat into the room over and above what the human body does.

My personal view is that 2 and 3 are very important, but I'm not so sure
about 1. Other comments ?

Regards,
Jordi

> De: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
> Responder a: <[email-masked]>
> Fecha: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:35:59 -0700
> Para: <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
> Conversación: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
> Asunto: RE: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
> 

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.

---

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:28:18 -0700

Hi Elwyn,

Thanks a lot for all your inputs (and same for the rest of contributors).

> three times a day at a reasonable cost can be a challenge.

You mean the break time is short ? I'm not sure that belongs to this
document, but more to a question of the meeting scheduling.

Regarding the cost, this is of course also considered during the
negotiation, so not sure if anything else need to be added into the document
about this.

> what the network providers need to do.... there are some fuzzy edges

Yes, the idea is to have two documents. In theory there is one somewhere
about the technical issues, but as I've not been able to get a copy, I
prefer to keep the text here mean while. At the end I can take it out and
contribute to a 2nd document with all that, or even start it from scratch
(if it doesn't becomes available from other authors) with all the comments.

> Editorial note: You should flag up that continental European conventions

What do you mean exactly ?

Regards,
Jordi

> De: Elwyn Davies <[email-masked]>
> Fecha: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:12:55 +0100
> Para: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
> CC: <[email-masked]>
> Asunto: Re: IETF Meeting Venue Selection Criteria
> 
> 
> 
> Ole Jacobsen wrote:
>

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 21:58:14 +0200

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
 
> I'm not so sure about 1. Other comments ?

Irrelevant as long as you're not planning an outdoor meeting,
and if above 0° C won't cause avalanches (= your 2nd point).
But smokers forced to meet outdoors could be a Bad Thing. ;-)

---

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 21:21:24 +0100

> 1) Outdoor temperature during the meeting above 0 degrees
> Centigrade and below 40.
>
> My personal view is that 2 and 3 are very important, but I'm not
> so sure about 1. Other comments ?

Jordi,
I find it hard to believe that outside temperatures are that important
especially considering the separate points about indoor temperature and
suitable airport transport.

But, if it is important, I think the boundaries are unreasonable. Zero
degrees Centigrade is actually quite warm (T-shirt weather, I'd say).

Cheers,
Adrian

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 09:07:33 +0300

My reading of the original thread was that outdoor temporary
was really a non-issue to almost everyone. Delete 1.

2 is obvious, delete.

We had some discussion about 3, but I think it could
be better summarized as "Ensure that the site under
consideration has adequate air-conditioning and/or heating
capacity.".