draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-00.txt   draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-01.txt 
IAOC F. Baker, Ed. IAOC R. Pelletier
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems Internet-Draft Internet Society
Intended status: Best Current Practice August 2, 2016 Intended status: Best Current Practice L. Nugent
Expires: February 3, 2017 Expires: February 23, 2017 Association Management Solutions
D. Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
L. Berger
LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
O. Jacobsen
The Internet Protocol Journal
J. Martin
INOC
F. Baker
August 22, 2016
IAOC Plenary Meeting Venue Selection Process IAOC Plenary Meeting Venue Selection Process
draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-00 draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-01
Abstract Abstract
This documents the IAOC's IETF Meeting Venue Selection Process from This documents the IAOC's IETF Meeting Venue Selection Process from
the perspective of its goals and thought processes. It points to the perspective of its goals and thought processes. It points to
additional process documents on the IAOC Web Site that go into additional process documents on the IAOC Web Site that go into
further detail and are subject to change with experience. further detail and are subject to change with experience.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
skipping to change at page 1, line 33 skipping to change at page 1, line 43
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on February 3, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 23, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Meeting Selection Participants and Responsibilities . . . . . 3 2. Venue Selection Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. The IETF Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Venue Selection Non-Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. IESG and IETF Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Venue Selection Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. The Internet Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.1. Venue City Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.4. IETF Administrative Oversight Committee . . . . . . . . . 4 4.2. Basic Venue Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.5. IETF Administrative Support Activity . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.3. Technical Services and Operations Criteria . . . . . . . 6
2.6. IETF Administrative Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.4. Lodging Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.7. IAOC Meeting Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.5. Food and Beverage Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3. Venue Selection Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. Venue Selection Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1. Venue Selection Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5.1. The IETF Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2. Venue Selection Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.2. IESG and IETF Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3. Venue Selection Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.3. The Internet Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3.1. Venue City Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.4. IETF Administrative Oversight Committee . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3.2. Basic Venue Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.5. IETF Administrative Support Activity . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.3.3. Technical Services and Operations Criteria . . . . . 10 5.6. IETF Administrative Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.3.4. Lodging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.7. IAOC Meeting Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.3.5. Food and Beverage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.8. Venue Selection Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.4. Non-criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6. Text carried forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.5. Venue Selection Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6.1. Venue Selection Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.6. Experience Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.1.1. Venue Selection Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4. Transparency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.1.2. Venue Selection Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.1.3. Venue Selection Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.1.4. Venue Selection Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.1.5. Experience Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.2. Transparency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 9. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document describes the IETF Meeting Venue Selection Process from This document describes the IETF Meeting Venue Selection Process from
the perspective of goals and thought processes. Following IETF 94 the perspective of goals and thought processes. Following IETF 94
and at IETF 95 there was a discussion on the IETF list of the and at IETF 95 there was a discussion on the IETF list of the
selection process and criteria for IETF meetings. In response to selection process and criteria for IETF meetings. In response to
that discussion, the IAOC and the IAOC Meetings Committee took it that discussion, the IAOC and the IAOC Meetings Committee took it
upon themselves to more publicly document its process and involve upon themselves to more publicly document its process and involve
community input. community input.
skipping to change at page 3, line 27 skipping to change at page 3, line 40
Desired: We would very much like to meet this requirement, but have Desired: We would very much like to meet this requirement, but have
frequently been unable to. The fact that we could not meet it is frequently been unable to. The fact that we could not meet it is
considered in comparison to other sites. considered in comparison to other sites.
Important: Can be a make-or-break consideration, but can also be Important: Can be a make-or-break consideration, but can also be
traded off against other considerations. traded off against other considerations.
Would be nice: Not make-or-break, but warrants additional Would be nice: Not make-or-break, but warrants additional
consideration if found to be true. consideration if found to be true.
2. Meeting Selection Participants and Responsibilities 2. Venue Selection Objectives
The formal structure of IETF administrative support functions is
documented in BCP 101 [RFC4071][RFC4371][RFC7691]. The reader is
expected to be familiar with the entities and roles defined by that
document, in particular for the IASA, ISOC, IAOC and IAD. This
section covers the meeting selection related roles of these and other
parties that participate in the process. Note that roles beyond
meeting selection, e.g., actually running and reporting on meetings,
are outside the scope of this document.
2.1. The IETF Community
While somewhat obvious to most, it is important to note that IETF
meetings serve all those who contribute to the development of IETF
RFCs. This includes those who attend meetings, from newcomer to
frequent attendee, to those who participate remotely, and to those
who don't attend but contribute to new RFCs. Potential new
contributors are also considered in the process.
IETF consensus with respect to the meeting venue selection process is
judged via standard IETF process and not by any other means, e.g.,
surveys. Surveys are used to gather information related to meeting
venues, but not to measure consensus.
2.2. IESG and IETF Chair
The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is a group comprised
of the IETF Area Directors and the IETF Chair. The IESG is
responsible for the management, along with the IAB, of the IETF, and
is the standards approval board for the IETF, as described in BCP9
[RFC2026]. This means that the IESG sets high level policies related
to, among other things, meeting venues. The IETF Chair is a member
of the IESG who, among other things, relays policies to the IAOC.
The IETF Chair is also a member of the IAOC.
2.3. The Internet Society
The Internet Society (ISOC) executes all venue contracts on behalf of
the IETF at the request of the IAOC; solicits meeting sponsorships;
collects all meeting-related revenues, including registration fees,
sponsorships, hotel commissions, and other miscellaneous revenues.
ISOC also provides accounting services, such as invoicing and monthly
financial statements. The meetings budget is managed by the IAD.
2.4. IETF Administrative Oversight Committee
The IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) has the
responsibility to oversee and select IETF meeting venues. It
instructs the IAD to work with the Internet Society to write the
relevant contracts. It approves the IETF meetings calendar.
2.5. IETF Administrative Support Activity
The IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA) supports the meeting
selection process. This includes identifying, qualifying and
reporting on potential meeting sites, as well as supporting meeting
venue contract negotiation. The IETF Secretariat is part of the IASA
under the management of the IAD.
2.6. IETF Administrative Director
The IETF Administrative Director (IAD) coordinates and supports the
activities of the IETF Secretariat, the IAOC Meetings Committee and
the IAOC to ensure the timely execution of the meeting process. This
includes participating in the IAOC Meeting Subcommittee and ensuring
its efforts are documented, leading venue contract negotiation, and
coordinating contract execution with ISOC.
2.7. IAOC Meeting Committee
The IAOC Meeting Committee is generally referred to as the Meetings
Committee.
The fundamental purpose of the committee is to participate in the
venue selection process, and to formulate recommendations to the IAOC
regarding meeting sites. It also tracks the meetings sponsorship
program, recommends extraordinary meeting-related expenses, and
recommends the IETF meetings calendar to the IAOC. The charter of
the committee is located here: https://iaoc.ietf.org/
committees.html#meetings.
Membership in the Meetings Committee is at the discretion of the
IAOC; it includes an IAOC appointed chair, the IETF Administrative
Director (IAD), IAOC members, representatives from the Secretariat,
and interested members of the community.
3. Venue Selection Process
The process of selecting a venue is described below and is based on
https://iaoc.ietf.org/venue-selection.html.
3.1. Venue Selection Principles Alissa's comment: "Why do we meet?," "Inclusiveness," and perhaps
reformulated versions of some other items listed, per draft-
sullivan-mtgvenue-decisions; 3.2)
The IETF, and therefore the IAOC and its Meetings Committee, have The IETF, and therefore the IAOC and its Meetings Committee, have
some core values that pervade the selection process. These are not some core values that pervade the selection process. These are not
limited to the following, but at minimum include them. limited to the following, but at minimum include them.
Who are we?
We are computer scientists, engineers, network operators,
academics, and other interested parties sharing the goal of making
the Internet work better. At this time, the vast majority of
attendees come from North America, Western and Central Europe, and
Eastern Asia. We also have participants from other regions.
Why do we meet? Why do we meet?
We meet to advance Internet standards development, to advance We meet to advance Internet standards development, to advance
Internet Drafts and RFCs. We meet to facilitate attendee Internet Drafts and RFCs. We meet to facilitate attendee
participation in multiple topics and to enable cross-pollination participation in multiple topics and to enable cross-pollination
of ideas and technology. of ideas and technology.
Where do we meet?
We meet in different locations globally in order to spread the
pain and cost of travel among active participants, balancing
travel time and expense across the regions from where IETF
participants are based. We also aim to enhance inclusiveness and
new contributions.
Inclusiveness: Inclusiveness:
We would like to facilitate the onsite or remote participation of We would like to facilitate the onsite or remote participation of
anyone who wants to be involved. Every country has limits on who anyone who wants to be involved. Every country has limits on who
it will permit within its borders. This principle of it will permit within its borders. This principle of
inclusiveness militates against the selection of venues within inclusiveness militates against the selection of venues within
countries that impose visa regulations and/or laws that countries that impose visa regulations and/or laws that
effectively exclude people on the basis of race, religion, gender, effectively exclude people on the basis of race, religion, gender,
sexual orientation, or national origin, and to a lesser extent, sexual orientation, or national origin, and to a lesser extent,
reduces the likelihood of selecting countries that use such reduces the likelihood of selecting countries that use such
attributes to make entry difficult. attributes to make entry difficult.
Internet Access: ? There may be other points from Section 6.1.1 to move here.
As an organization, we write specifications for the Internet, and
we use it heavily. Meeting attendees need unfiltered access to
the general Internet and our corporate networks, which are usually
reached using encrypted VPNs from the meeting venue and hotels,
including overflow hotels. We also need open network access
available at high enough data rates to support our work, including
the support of remote participation.
Focus:
We meet to have focused technical discussions. These are not
limited to breakout sessions, although of course those are
important; they also happen over meals or drinks (including a
specific type of non-session that we call a "Bar BOF"), or in side
meetings. Environments that are noisy or distracting prevent that
or reduce its effectiveness, and are therefore less desirable as a
meeting venue.
Economics:
Meeting attendees participate as individuals. While many have
their participation underwritten by employers or sponsors, there
are many who do not. Locations that do not provide convenient
budget alternatives for food and lodging, or which are multiple
travel segments from major airports, are therefore exclusionary,
and violate our value of "Inclusiveness". Within reason, budget
should not be a barrier to accommodation.
Political considerations:
The IETF does not make political statements. We do not decide who
is or is not a country, and we do not choose or not choose venues
based on political criteria.
3.2. Venue Selection Objectives
Venues for meetings are selected to advance the objectives of the
IETF, which are discussed in https://www.ietf.org/about/mission.html.
The IAOC's supporting objectives include:
o Advancing standards development
o Facilitating participation by active contributors
o Sharing the travel pain; balancing travel time and expense across
the regions from where IETF participants are based.
o Encouraging new contributors
o Generating funds to support IETF operations in support of 3. Venue Selection Non-Objectives
standards development, including the Secretariat, IASA, and the
RFC Editor.
There is an explicit intent to rotate meeting locations equally among Alissa's comment: ( 3.1 "Political considerations," 3.4)
several places in accordance with IETF policy. However, a consistent
balance is sometimes difficult to achieve. The IAOC has an objective
of setting the Regions 4 years in advance, meeting in Europe, North
America, and Asia, with a possibility of occasionally meeting outside
those regions. This policy, known as the 1-1-1* model, is set by the
IESG, https://iaoc.ietf.org/minutes/2010-11-10-iaoc-minutes.txt, and
is further discussed in [I-D.krishnan-ietf-meeting-policy]. The
reason for the multi-year timeframe is maximization of opportunities;
the smaller the time available to qualify and contract a conference
venue, the more stress imposed on the qualification process, and the
greater the risk of not finding a suitable venue or paying more for
it.
There is no formal policy regarding rotation of regions, the time of IETF meeting venues are not selected for the purposes of:
year for a meeting in a specific region, or whether a meeting in a
non-targeted region replaces a visit to one of the regions during
that year.
The IETF chair drives selection of "*" locations, i.e., venues o endorsing or condemning particular countries, laws, regulations,
outside the usual regions, and requires community input. These policies, or policy positions.
selections usually arise from evidence of growing interest and
participation in the new region. Expressions of interest from
possible hosts also factor into the meeting site selection process,
for any meeting.
Increased participation in the IETF from those other regions, o visiting new locations for the sake of variety in meeting
electronically or in person, could result in basic changes to the locations.
overall pattern, and we encourage those who would like for that to
occur to encourage participation from those regions.
3.3. Venue Selection Criteria 4. Venue Selection Criteria
A number of criteria are considered during the site selection A number of criteria are considered during the site selection
process. The list following is not sorted in any particular order, process. The list following is not sorted in any particular order,
but includes the committee's major considerations. but includes the committee's major considerations.
The selection of a venue always requires trade-offs. There are no The selection of a venue always requires trade-offs. There are no
perfect venues. For example, a site may not have a single hotel that perfect venues. For example, a site may not have a single hotel that
can accommodate a significant number of the attendees of a typical can accommodate a significant number of the attendees of a typical
IETF. That doesn't disqualify it, but it may reduce its desirability IETF. That doesn't disqualify it, but it may reduce its desirability
in the presence of an alternative that does. in the presence of an alternative that does.
skipping to change at page 8, line 29 skipping to change at page 5, line 10
nice". These terms guide the trade-off analysis portion of the nice". These terms guide the trade-off analysis portion of the
selection process. All "Mandatory" labeled criteria must be met for selection process. All "Mandatory" labeled criteria must be met for
a venue to be selected. The remaining terms may be viewed as a venue to be selected. The remaining terms may be viewed as
weighting factors. weighting factors.
There are times where the evaluation of the criteria will be There are times where the evaluation of the criteria will be
subjective. This is even the case for criteria labeled as subjective. This is even the case for criteria labeled as
"Mandatory". For this reason, the Meetings Committee will "Mandatory". For this reason, the Meetings Committee will
specifically review, and affirm to its satisfaction, that all specifically review, and affirm to its satisfaction, that all
"Mandatory" labeled criteria are satisfied by a particular venue and "Mandatory" labeled criteria are satisfied by a particular venue and
main IETF hotel as part of the process defined below in Section 3.5. main IETF hotel as part of the process defined below in Section 5.8.
3.3.1. Venue City Considerations 4.1. Venue City Criteria
Alissa's comment: 3.3.1 bullets 1, 5, 6, plus other bullets from
Section 6.1.3.1 if reformulated as criteria)
Note that these considerations are not "make or break" but flexible
enough to allow for trade-offs and judgement on the part of the IAOC.
Ideally, a city will meet all criteria. If all criteria cannot be
met, the IETF community needs to consider the trade-off acceptable.
o Travel to the venue is reasonably acceptable based on cost, time, o Travel to the venue is reasonably acceptable based on cost, time,
and burden for participants traveling from multiple regions. It and burden for participants traveling from multiple regions. It
is anticipated that the burden borne will be generally shared over is anticipated that the burden borne will be generally shared over
the course of the year. [Important] the course of the year. [Important]
o Travel barriers to entry, e.g., visa requirements that can limit
participation, are researched, noted, and carefully considered.
[Important]
o Economic, safety, and health risks associated with this venue are
researched, reviewed and carefully considered, at the time the
selection is made, and thereafter as the time for the meeting
approaches. [Important]
o Review available travel information (such as
https://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/country.html) for
issues that would be counter to our principles on inclusiveness
etc. [Important]
o The venue is assessed as favorable for obtaining a host and o The venue is assessed as favorable for obtaining a host and
sponsors. That is, the Meeting is in a location and at a price sponsors. That is, the Meeting is in a location and at a price
that it is possible and probable to find a host and sponsors. that it is possible and probable to find a host and sponsors.
[Important] [Important]
o Prior successful IETF experience with the Venue and Venue city o Ability to enter into a multi-event contract with the venue to
will be considered as a positive factor when deciding among optimize meeting and attendee benefits, i.e., reduce
multiple venues. [Would be nice] administrative costs and reduce direct attendee costs, will be
considered a positive factor. [Would be nice]
o Consideration will be given to whether it makes sense to enter o Travel barriers to entry, e.g., visa requirements that can limit
into a multi-event contract with the venue to optimize meeting and participation, are acceptable to the IETF community. [Important]
attendee benefits, i.e., reduce administrative costs and reduce
direct attendee costs. [Would be nice]
3.3.2. Basic Venue Criteria o Economic, safety, and health risks associated with this venue are
acceptable to the IETF community. [Important]
o Available travel issue assessments (such as
https://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/country.html) have
been pointed out the IETF community. [Important]
4.2. Basic Venue Criteria
Alissa's comment: ( 3.3.2 bullets 1, 3, 4, 5, 6)
o The Meeting Space is adequate in size and layout to accommodate o The Meeting Space is adequate in size and layout to accommodate
the meeting and foster participant interaction. [Mandatory] the meeting and foster participant interaction. [Mandatory]
o The venue and hotels can be put under contract. The subsequent
failure to put a selected venue under contract will result in a
re-evaluation of the venues and selection for the meeting.
[Mandatory]
o The cost of guest rooms, meeting space, meeting food and beverage o The cost of guest rooms, meeting space, meeting food and beverage
is affordable (within the norms of business travel). [Mandatory] is affordable (within the norms of business travel). [Mandatory]
o The economics of the venue allow the meeting to be net cash o The economics of the venue allow the meeting to be net cash
positive [Mandatory]. positive [Mandatory].
o An Optimal Facility for an IETF meeting is held under "One Roof", o An Optimal Facility for an IETF meeting is held under "One Roof",
that is, qualified meeting space and guest rooms are available in that is, qualified meeting space and guest rooms are available in
the same facility. [Desired] the same facility. [Desired]
skipping to change at page 10, line 5 skipping to change at page 6, line 26
with disabilities. with disabilities.
* The selected facility conforms with local accessibility laws * The selected facility conforms with local accessibility laws
and regulations [Mandatory] and regulations [Mandatory]
* http://www.sigaccess.org/welcome-to-sigaccess/resources/ * http://www.sigaccess.org/welcome-to-sigaccess/resources/
accessible-conference-guide/ provides a definition of related accessible-conference-guide/ provides a definition of related
considerations that shall be used in evaluating this criterion. considerations that shall be used in evaluating this criterion.
[Desired] [Desired]
3.3.3. Technical Services and Operations Criteria 4.3. Technical Services and Operations Criteria
Alissa's comment: ( 3.3.3)
o The Venue's support technologies and services -- network, audio- o The Venue's support technologies and services -- network, audio-
video, etc., are sufficient for the anticipated activities at the video, etc., are sufficient for the anticipated activities at the
meeting, or the venue is willing to add such infrastructure at no meeting, or the venue is willing to add such infrastructure at no
or at an acceptable cost to the IETF. [Mandatory] or at an acceptable cost to the IETF. [Mandatory]
o The meeting venue must permit and facilitate the delivery of a o The meeting venue must permit and facilitate the delivery of a
high performance, robust, unfiltered and unmodified IETF Network. high performance, robust, unfiltered and unmodified IETF Network.
[Mandatory] [Mandatory]
skipping to change at page 10, line 29 skipping to change at page 7, line 5
and facilitate, the delivery of a high performance, robust, and facilitate, the delivery of a high performance, robust,
unfiltered and unmodified Internet service for the public areas unfiltered and unmodified Internet service for the public areas
and guest rooms. This service is typically included in the cost and guest rooms. This service is typically included in the cost
of the room. [Mandatory] of the room. [Mandatory]
o The overflow hotels should provide reasonable, reliable, o The overflow hotels should provide reasonable, reliable,
unfiltered Internet service for the public areas and guest rooms. unfiltered Internet service for the public areas and guest rooms.
This service is typically included in the cost of the room. This service is typically included in the cost of the room.
[Desired] [Desired]
3.3.4. Lodging 4.4. Lodging Criteria
Alissa's comment: ( 3.3.4)
o The IETF hotel(s) are within close proximity to each other and the o The IETF hotel(s) are within close proximity to each other and the
venue. [Mandatory] venue. [Mandatory]
o The Guest Rooms at the IETF hotel(s) are sufficient in number to o The Guest Rooms at the IETF hotel(s) are sufficient in number to
house 1/3 or more of projected meeting attendees. [Mandatory] house 1/3 or more of projected meeting attendees. [Mandatory]
o The Venue environs include budget hotels within convenient travel o The Venue environs include budget hotels within convenient travel
time, cost, and effort. [Mandatory] time, cost, and effort. [Mandatory]
skipping to change at page 11, line 5 skipping to change at page 7, line 32
o The IETF hotel(s) are accessible by people with disabilities. o The IETF hotel(s) are accessible by people with disabilities.
* The selected facility conforms with local accessibility laws * The selected facility conforms with local accessibility laws
and regulations [Mandatory] and regulations [Mandatory]
* http://www.sigaccess.org/welcome-to-sigaccess/resources/ * http://www.sigaccess.org/welcome-to-sigaccess/resources/
accessible-conference-guide/ provides a definition of related accessible-conference-guide/ provides a definition of related
considerations that shall be used in evaluating this criterion. considerations that shall be used in evaluating this criterion.
[Desired] [Desired]
3.3.5. Food and Beverage 4.5. Food and Beverage Criteria
Alissa's comment: ( 3.3.5)
o The Venue environs, which includes onsite, and the areas within a o The Venue environs, which includes onsite, and the areas within a
reasonable walking distance, or conveniently accessible by a short reasonable walking distance, or conveniently accessible by a short
taxi, bus, or subway ride, has convenient and inexpensive choices taxi, bus, or subway ride, has convenient and inexpensive choices
for meals that can accommodate a wide range of dietary for meals that can accommodate a wide range of dietary
requirements. [Mandatory] requirements. [Mandatory]
o The Venue environs include grocery shopping that will accommodate o The Venue environs include grocery shopping that will accommodate
a wide range of dietary requirements, within a reasonable walking a wide range of dietary requirements, within a reasonable walking
distance, or conveniently accessible by a short taxi, bus, or distance, or conveniently accessible by a short taxi, bus, or
subway ride. [Desired] subway ride. [Desired]
3.4. Non-criteria 5. Venue Selection Process
The following is specifically not among the selection criteria: Alissa's comment: ( 2)
o Visiting new locations for the sake of variety in meeting The formal structure of IETF administrative support functions is
locations. documented in BCP 101 [RFC4071][RFC4371][RFC7691]. The reader is
expected to be familiar with the entities and roles defined by that
document, in particular for the IASA, ISOC, IAOC and IAD. This
section covers the meeting selection related roles of these and other
parties that participate in the process. Note that roles beyond
meeting selection, e.g., actually running and reporting on meetings,
are outside the scope of this document.
3.5. Venue Selection Phases 5.1. The IETF Community
While somewhat obvious to most, it is important to note that IETF
meetings serve all those who contribute to the development of IETF
RFCs. This includes those who attend meetings, from newcomer to
frequent attendee, to those who participate remotely, and to those
who don't attend but contribute to new RFCs. Potential new
contributors are also considered in the process.
IETF consensus with respect to the meeting venue selection process is
judged via standard IETF process and not by any other means, e.g.,
surveys. Surveys are used to gather information related to meeting
venues, but not to measure consensus.
5.2. IESG and IETF Chair
The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is a group comprised
of the IETF Area Directors and the IETF Chair. The IESG is
responsible for the management, along with the IAB, of the IETF, and
is the standards approval board for the IETF, as described in BCP9
[RFC2026]. This means that the IESG sets high level policies related
to, among other things, meeting venues. The IETF Chair is a member
of the IESG who, among other things, relays policies to the IAOC.
The IETF Chair is also a member of the IAOC.
5.3. The Internet Society
The Internet Society (ISOC) executes all venue contracts on behalf of
the IETF at the request of the IAOC; solicits meeting sponsorships;
collects all meeting-related revenues, including registration fees,
sponsorships, hotel commissions, and other miscellaneous revenues.
ISOC also provides accounting services, such as invoicing and monthly
financial statements. The meetings budget is managed by the IAD.
5.4. IETF Administrative Oversight Committee
The IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) has the
responsibility to oversee and select IETF meeting venues. It
instructs the IAD to work with the Internet Society to write the
relevant contracts. It approves the IETF meetings calendar.
5.5. IETF Administrative Support Activity
The IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA) supports the meeting
selection process. This includes identifying, qualifying and
reporting on potential meeting sites, as well as supporting meeting
venue contract negotiation. The IETF Secretariat is part of the IASA
under the management of the IAD.
5.6. IETF Administrative Director
The IETF Administrative Director (IAD) coordinates and supports the
activities of the IETF Secretariat, the IAOC Meetings Committee and
the IAOC to ensure the timely execution of the meeting process. This
includes participating in the IAOC Meeting Subcommittee and ensuring
its efforts are documented, leading venue contract negotiation, and
coordinating contract execution with ISOC.
5.7. IAOC Meeting Committee
The IAOC Meeting Committee is generally referred to as the Meetings
Committee.
The fundamental purpose of the committee is to participate in the
venue selection process, and to formulate recommendations to the IAOC
regarding meeting sites. It also tracks the meetings sponsorship
program, recommends extraordinary meeting-related expenses, and
recommends the IETF meetings calendar to the IAOC. The charter of
the committee is located here: https://iaoc.ietf.org/
committees.html#meetings.
Membership in the Meetings Committee is at the discretion of the
IAOC; it includes an IAOC appointed chair, the IETF Administrative
Director (IAD), IAOC members, representatives from the Secretariat,
and interested members of the community.
5.8. Venue Selection Phases
Alissa's comment: ( 3.5, perhaps with additional detail currently
in 3.3.1 bullets 2, 3, 4)
Commencing the process four years in advance of an event results in Commencing the process four years in advance of an event results in
the following schedule as a guideline: the following schedule as a guideline:
Phase 1: Identification and Preliminary Investigation Phase 1: Identification and Preliminary Investigation
Four years out, a process identifies cities for meetings and Four years out, a process identifies cities for meetings and
initiates site selection. initiates site selection.
A. The IAOC selects regions for meetings. A. The IAOC selects regions for meetings.
skipping to change at page 13, line 14 skipping to change at page 11, line 32
meeting in the contracted city and provides findings to the meeting in the contracted city and provides findings to the
IAOC. IAOC.
B. IAOC considers the information provided and evaluates the risk B. IAOC considers the information provided and evaluates the risk
- if significant risk is identified, the Contingency Planning - if significant risk is identified, the Contingency Planning
Flow Chart (https://iaoc.ietf.org/meetings-committee/venue- Flow Chart (https://iaoc.ietf.org/meetings-committee/venue-
selection.html) is followed, if current risk is not selection.html) is followed, if current risk is not
significant, the situation is monitored through the meeting to significant, the situation is monitored through the meeting to
ensure there is no significant change. ensure there is no significant change.
3.6. Experience Notes 6. Text carried forward
This document is being reorganized along an outline proposed by
Alissa Cooper. In preceding sections, her comment is made explicit.
That is intended to be removed when the reorganization is complete.
Text in this section is left over and will potentially be moved to
preceding sections.
6.1. Venue Selection Process
The process of selecting a venue is described below and is based on
https://iaoc.ietf.org/venue-selection.html.
6.1.1. Venue Selection Principles
heading paragraph moved to Section 2.
Who are we?
We are computer scientists, engineers, network operators,
academics, and other interested parties sharing the goal of making
the Internet work better. At this time, the vast majority of
attendees come from North America, Western and Central Europe, and
Eastern Asia. We also have participants from other regions.
Why do we meet? Moved to Section 2.
Where do we meet?
We meet in different locations globally in order to spread the
pain and cost of travel among active participants, balancing
travel time and expense across the regions from where IETF
participants are based. We also aim to enhance inclusiveness and
new contributions.
Inclusiveness: Moved to Section 2.
Internet Access:
As an organization, we write specifications for the Internet, and
we use it heavily. Meeting attendees need unfiltered access to
the general Internet and our corporate networks, which are usually
reached using encrypted VPNs from the meeting venue and hotels,
including overflow hotels. We also need open network access
available at high enough data rates to support our work, including
the support of remote participation.
Focus:
We meet to have focused technical discussions. These are not
limited to breakout sessions, although of course those are
important; they also happen over meals or drinks (including a
specific type of non-session that we call a "Bar BOF"), or in side
meetings. Environments that are noisy or distracting prevent that
or reduce its effectiveness, and are therefore less desirable as a
meeting venue.
Economics:
Meeting attendees participate as individuals. While many have
their participation underwritten by employers or sponsors, there
are many who do not. Locations that do not provide convenient
budget alternatives for food and lodging, or which are multiple
travel segments from major airports, are therefore exclusionary,
and violate our value of "Inclusiveness". Within reason, budget
should not be a barrier to accommodation.
Political considerations: moved to Section 3 and reworded per
Alissa's suggested text.
6.1.2. Venue Selection Objectives
Venues for meetings are selected to advance the objectives of the
IETF, which are discussed in https://www.ietf.org/about/mission.html.
The IAOC's supporting objectives include:
o Advancing standards development
o Facilitating participation by active contributors
o Sharing the travel pain; balancing travel time and expense across
the regions from where IETF participants are based.
o Encouraging new contributors
o Generating funds to support IETF operations in support of
standards development, including the Secretariat, IASA, and the
RFC Editor.
There is an explicit intent to rotate meeting locations equally among
several places in accordance with IETF policy. However, a consistent
balance is sometimes difficult to achieve. The IAOC has an objective
of setting the Regions 4 years in advance, meeting in Europe, North
America, and Asia, with a possibility of occasionally meeting outside
those regions. This policy, known as the 1-1-1* model, is set by the
IESG, https://iaoc.ietf.org/minutes/2010-11-10-iaoc-minutes.txt, and
is further discussed in [I-D.krishnan-ietf-meeting-policy]. The
reason for the multi-year timeframe is maximization of opportunities;
the smaller the time available to qualify and contract a conference
venue, the more stress imposed on the qualification process, and the
greater the risk of not finding a suitable venue or paying more for
it.
There is no formal policy regarding rotation of regions, the time of
year for a meeting in a specific region, or whether a meeting in a
non-targeted region replaces a visit to one of the regions during
that year.
The IETF chair drives selection of "*" locations, i.e., venues
outside the usual regions, and requires community input. These
selections usually arise from evidence of growing interest and
participation in the new region. Expressions of interest from
possible hosts also factor into the meeting site selection process,
for any meeting.
Increased participation in the IETF from those other regions,
electronically or in person, could result in basic changes to the
overall pattern, and we encourage those who would like for that to
occur to encourage participation from those regions.
6.1.3. Venue Selection Criteria
Heading text moved to Section 4.
6.1.3.1. Venue City Considerations
o Consideration will be given to whether it makes sense to enter
into a multi-event contract with the venue to optimize meeting and
attendee benefits, i.e., reduce administrative costs and reduce
direct attendee costs. [Would be nice]
6.1.3.2. Basic Venue Criteria
o moved to Section 4.2
o The venue and hotels can be put under contract. The subsequent
failure to put a selected venue under contract will result in a
re-evaluation of the venues and selection for the meeting.
[Mandatory]
6.1.4. Venue Selection Phases
6.1.5. Experience Notes
a. The foregoing process works with reasonable certainty in North a. The foregoing process works with reasonable certainty in North
America and Europe. America and Europe.
b. Experience to date for Asia and Latin America is that contracts b. Experience to date for Asia and Latin America is that contracts
take longer and often will not be executed more than two years in take longer and often will not be executed more than two years in
advance of the meeting. While the IETF will have the first advance of the meeting. While the IETF will have the first
option for the dates, for reasons not completely understood option for the dates, for reasons not completely understood
contracts won't be executed. contracts won't be executed.
4. Transparency 6.2. Transparency
BCP 101 requires transparency in IASA process and contracts, and BCP 101 requires transparency in IASA process and contracts, and
thereby of the meetings committee. BCP 101 also states that the IAOC thereby of the meetings committee. BCP 101 also states that the IAOC
approves what information is to remain confidential. Therefore any approves what information is to remain confidential. Therefore any
information produced by the meetings committee or related to meetings information produced by the meetings committee or related to meetings
that individuals believe is confidential, e.g., venue contracts, must that individuals believe is confidential, e.g., venue contracts, must
be confirmed to be confidential by the IAOC. be confirmed to be confidential by the IAOC.
5. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
This memo asks the IANA for no new parameters. This memo asks the IANA for no new parameters.
6. Security Considerations 8. Security Considerations
This note proposes no protocols, and therefore no new protocol This note proposes no protocols, and therefore no new protocol
insecurities. insecurities.
7. Privacy Considerations 9. Privacy Considerations
This note reveals no personally identifying information apart from This note reveals no personally identifying information apart from
its authorship. its authorship.
8. Contributors 10. Acknowledgements
In addition to the editor, text was developed by
Ray Pelletier
Internet Society
Email: rpelletier@isoc.org
Laura Nugent
Association Management Solutions
+1 (510) 492-4008
Email: lnugent@amsl.com
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
+1.408.246.8253
Email: dcrocker@bbiw.net
Lou Berger
LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
Email: lberger@labn.net
Ole Jacobsen
The Internet Protocol Journal
+1 415 550-9433
Email: olejacobsen@me.com
Jim Martin
INOC
+1 608 807-0454
Email: jim@inoc.com
9. Acknowledgements
Additional commentary came from Jari Arkko and Scott Bradner. Additional commentary came from Jari Arkko, Scott Bradner, and Alissa
Cooper. It was discussed on mtgvenue@ietf.org.
10. References 11. References
10.1. Normative References 11.1. Normative References
[I-D.krishnan-ietf-meeting-policy] [I-D.krishnan-ietf-meeting-policy]
Krishnan, S., "High level guidance for the meeting policy Krishnan, S., "High level guidance for the meeting policy
of the IETF", draft-krishnan-ietf-meeting-policy-01 (work of the IETF", draft-krishnan-ietf-meeting-policy-01 (work
in progress), July 2016. in progress), July 2016.
[RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, DOI 10.17487/RFC2026, October 1996, 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, DOI 10.17487/RFC2026, October 1996,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2026>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2026>.
skipping to change at page 15, line 19 skipping to change at page 16, line 5
[RFC4371] Carpenter, B., Ed. and L. Lynch, Ed., "BCP 101 Update for [RFC4371] Carpenter, B., Ed. and L. Lynch, Ed., "BCP 101 Update for
IPR Trust", BCP 101, RFC 4371, DOI 10.17487/RFC4371, IPR Trust", BCP 101, RFC 4371, DOI 10.17487/RFC4371,
January 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4371>. January 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4371>.
[RFC7691] Bradner, S., Ed., "Updating the Term Dates of IETF [RFC7691] Bradner, S., Ed., "Updating the Term Dates of IETF
Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) Members", BCP Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) Members", BCP
101, RFC 7691, DOI 10.17487/RFC7691, November 2015, 101, RFC 7691, DOI 10.17487/RFC7691, November 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7691>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7691>.
10.2. Informative References 11.2. Informative References
[I-D.barnes-healthy-food] [I-D.barnes-healthy-food]
Barnes, M., "Healthy Food and Special Dietary Requirements Barnes, M., "Healthy Food and Special Dietary Requirements
for IETF meetings", draft-barnes-healthy-food-07 (work in for IETF meetings", draft-barnes-healthy-food-07 (work in
progress), July 2013. progress), July 2013.
Appendix A. Change Log Appendix A. Change Log
2016-01-12: Initial version 2016-01-12: Initial version
skipping to change at page 15, line 45 skipping to change at page 16, line 31
2016-02-23: Reorganize and capture IAOC Meetings Committee 2016-02-23: Reorganize and capture IAOC Meetings Committee
discussions. discussions.
2016-03-03: Final from Design Team. 2016-03-03: Final from Design Team.
2016-03-17: First update incorporating mtgvenue@ietf.org comments 2016-03-17: First update incorporating mtgvenue@ietf.org comments
2016-05-20 Updated in accordance with editing by Laura Nugent, Dave 2016-05-20 Updated in accordance with editing by Laura Nugent, Dave
Crocker, Lou Berger, Fred Baker, and others. Crocker, Lou Berger, Fred Baker, and others.
Author's Address posting as working group draft August 2, 2016
Fred Baker (editor) Reorganized per Alissa Cooper outline Work in progress. In
Cisco Systems addition, contributors were re-organized to be authors.
Santa Barbara, California 93117
USA Authors' Addresses
Ray Pelletier
Internet Society
Email: rpelletier@isoc.org
Laura Nugent
Association Management Solutions
Email: lnugent@amsl.com
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
Email: dcrocker@bbiw.net
Lou Berger
LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
Email: lberger@labn.net
Ole Jacobsen
The Internet Protocol Journal
Email: olejacobsen@me.com
Jim Martin
INOC
Email: jim@inoc.com
Fred Baker
Email: fred@cisco.com Email: fred@cisco.com
 End of changes. 42 change blocks. 
305 lines changed or deleted 373 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/