mtgvenue                                                    R. Pelletier
Internet-Draft                                          Internet Society
Intended status: Best Current Practice                         L. Nugent
Expires: May 4, June 3, 2017                   Association Management Solutions
                                                         D. Crocker, Ed.
                                             Brandenburg InternetWorking
                                                               L. Berger
                                                 LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
                                                             O. Jacobsen
                                           The Internet Protocol Journal
                                                               J. Martin
                                                                    INOC
                                                           F. Baker, Ed.
                                                        October 31,
                                                       November 30, 2016

              IETF Plenary Meeting Venue Selection Process
          draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-02
          draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-03

Abstract

   The IAOC has responsibility for arranging IETF plenary meeting Venue
   selection and operation.  This documents document details the IETF's Meeting
   Venue Selection Process from the perspective of its goals, criteria
   and thought processes.  It points to additional process documents on
   the IAOC Web Site that go into further detail and are subject to
   change with experience.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on May 4, June 3, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Background  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.2.  *** Post-Seoul Revisions ***  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.3.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3   4
   2.  Venue Selection Objectives  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3   4
     2.1.  Core Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.2.  Venue Selection Non-Objectives  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Venue Selection Criteria  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5   6
     3.1.  Venue City Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.2.  Basic Venue Criteria  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.3.  Technical Services and Operations Criteria  . . . . . . .   7   8
     3.4.  Lodging Criteria  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8   9
     3.5.  Food and Beverage Criteria  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8  10
   4.  Venue Selection Process Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9 .  11
     4.1.  The IETF Community  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9  11
     4.2.  IESG and IETF Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9  12
     4.3.  The Internet Society  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10  12
     4.4.  IETF Administrative Oversight Committee . . . . . . . . .  10  12
     4.5.  IETF Administrative Support Activity  . . . . . . . . . .  10  12
     4.6.  IETF Administrative Director  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10  12
     4.7.  IAOC Meeting Committee  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     4.8.  13
   5.  Venue Selection Phases Steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   5. . . .  13
     5.1.  Identification  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     5.2.  Consultation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     5.3.  Qualification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     5.4.  Negotiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     5.5.  Final Check . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   6.  Text carried forward  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     5.1.  15
     6.1.  Venue Selection Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     5.2.  15
     6.2.  Transparency  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   6.  18
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   7.  18
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   8.  18
   9.  Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   9.  18
   10. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   10.  18
   11. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     10.1.  18
     11.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     10.2.  18
     11.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16  19
   Appendix A.  Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17  19
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17  20

1.  Introduction

   The IAOC has responsibility for arranging IETF plenary meeting venue
   selection and operation.  This document describes the IETF Meeting
   Venue Selection Process from the perspective of goals, criteria and
   thought processes.  It describes the objectives and principles behind
   the venue Venue selection process.  It also discusses the actual selection
   process to one level of detail, and points to working documents used
   in execution.

1.1.  Background

   Following IETF 94 and at IETF 95 there was a discussion on the IETF
   list of the selection process and criteria for IETF meetings.  In
   response to that discussion, the IAOC and the IAOC Meetings Committee
   took it upon themselves to more publicly document its process and
   involve
   refine it, based on community input.

1.2.  Requirements Language

   Requirements called out in  *** Post-Seoul Revisions ***

   Comments on this document are identified as either
   "mandatory" or "desired", post-Seoul version:

   o  Many items from the Sullivan draft have been included.

   o  A number of criteria had confusing wording and considerations are tagged as
   "Important" or "Would be nice".  For clarity, have been revised.
      The confusion was about the terms are defined
   here: difference between a process that must
      be followed, versus a decision based on that process.  Following
      the process is Mandatory.  The details of the decision, however,
      are not pre-determined.

   o  Extensive reformulation of the document layout.

   EDITOR'S DISCLAIMER:    This attempts to reflect the work of the
      Seould mtgvenue discussions but is certain to have missed and/or
      misinterpreted quite a bit.  Some changes were the result of off-
      list discussions; they seem to resolve specific issues but of
      course the final decision rests with the working group... Please
      post explicit text change requests to the list.  /Dave

1.3.  Requirements Language

   Requirements called out in this document are identified by the degree
   of requirement.  The labels that are used are:

   Mandatory:
      If this requirement cannot be met, a location under consideration
      is unacceptable.  We walk away.

   Important:
      Does not qualify as Mandatory, but is still highly significant;
      can possibly be traded off against other Important considerations.

   Desired:
      We would very much like to meet this requirement, but have
      frequently been unable to.  The fact that we could not the failure
      to meet it is
      considered in comparison to other sites.

   Important:  Can be will not disqualify a make-or-break consideration, but can also be
      traded off against other considerations.

   Would be nice:  Not make-or-break, but warrants additional
      consideration if found to be true. Venue.

2.  Venue Selection Objectives

      Alissa's comment: "Why do we meet?," "Inclusiveness," and perhaps
      reformulated versions of some other items listed, per draft-
      sullivan-mtgvenue-decisions; 3.2)

      Editor comment: This section is believed to be complete. /d

2.1.  Core Values

   The IETF has some core values that to pervade the selection process.
   The values are not limited to the following, but at minimum include
   them.

   Why do we meet?
      We meet to advance pursue the IETF's mission [RFC3935], partly by
      advancing the development of Internet Drafts Internet-Drafts and RFCs.  We also
      seek to facilitate attendee participation in multiple topics and
      to enable cross-pollination of ideas and technologies.

   Inclusiveness:
      We would like to facilitate the onsite or remote participation of
      anyone who wants to be involved.

      Every country has limits on who it will permit within its borders.
      However the IETF seeks to:

      1.  Minimize situations in which onerous entry regulations prevent
          participants from attending meetings, or failing that to
          distribute meeting locations such that onerous entry
          regulations are not always experienced by the same attendees;
          and

      2.  Avoid meeting in countries with laws that effectively exclude
          people on the basis of race, religion, gender, sexual
          orientation, national origin, or gender identity.

   Where do we meet?
      We meet in different locations globally globally, in order to spread the
      difficulty and cost of travel among active participants, balancing
      travel time and expense across the regions in which IETF
      participants are based.

   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 Venue and hotels,
      including overflow hotels.  We also need open network access
      available at high enough data rates rates, at the meeting Facility, to
      support our work, including the support of remote participation.[MeetingNet] participation.
      [MeetingNet]

   Focus:
      We meet to have focused technical discussions.  These are not
      limited to scheduled 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. Venue.

   Economics:
      Meeting attendees participate as individuals.  While many are
      underwritten by employers or sponsors, many are self-funded.  In
      order to reduce participations participation costs and travel effort, we
      therefore seek locations that provide convenient budget
      alternatives for food and lodging, and which are minimize travel
      segments from major airports. airports to the Venue.  Within reason, budget
      should not be a barrier to accommodation.

   ?  There may be other points from Section 5.1.1 to move here.

      Editor comment: This section is believed to be complete. /d

2.2.  Venue Selection Non-Objectives

      Alissa's comment: ( 3.1 "Political considerations," 3.4)

      Editor comment: This section is believed to be complete. /d

   IETF meeting venues Venues are not selected or declined with the explicit
   purposes of:

   o

   Politics:
      Endorsing or condemning particular countries, political paradigms,
      laws, regulations, or policies.

   o

   Maximal attendance:
      Because the IETF garners a significant portion of its revenue from
      IETF meeting fees, there is considerable incentive for decision-
      makers to prefer a Venue that will attract more attendees.  It is
      important to resist this temptation: a larger meeting in which key
      contributors could not make it is not a better meeting; neither is
      one with a lot of "tourists".

   Tourism:
      Variety in site-seeing experiences.

3.  Venue Selection Criteria

   A number of criteria are considered during the site selection
   process.  The list following is not sorted in any particular order,
   but includes the committee's major considerations.

   The selection of a venue Venue always requires trade-offs.  There are no
   perfect venues.  For example, a site may might not have a single hotel
   that can accommodate a significant number of the attendees of a
   typical IETF.  That doesn't disqualify it, but it may might reduce its
   desirability in the presence of an alternative that does.

   Each identified criterion is labeled with the terms defined above in
   Section 1.2, i.e., "Mandatory", "Desired", "Important" or "Would be
   nice".  These terms guide the trade-off analysis portion of the
   selection process.  All "Mandatory" labeled criteria must be met for
   a venue to be selected.  The remaining terms may be viewed as
   weighting factors.

   There are times where

   Many of the evaluation of the criteria will be are subjective.  This is might even be
   the case for criteria labeled as "Mandatory".  For this reason, the
   IAOC and Meetings Committee will specifically review, and affirm to
   their satisfaction, that all "Mandatory" labeled criteria are
   satisfied by a particular venue and
   main IETF hotel Venue, as part of the process defined below
   in Section 4.8.

3.1.  Venue City Criteria

      Alissa's comment: 3.3.1 bullets 1, 5, 6, plus other bullets from
      Section 5.1.3.1 if reformulated as criteria)

   Note that these considerations are not "make or break" but flexible
   enough to allow for trade-offs and judgement on 5.

   Three terms describe the part of places for which the IAOC.
   Ideally, a city will meet all criteria.  If all criteria cannot be
   met, IETF contracts
   services:

   Venue:
      This is an umbrella term for the city, meeting resources and guest
      room resources.

   Facility:
      These contain meeting rooms and associated resources, and possibly
      also contain hotel rooms.

   IETF community needs Hotels:
      One or more hotels, in close proximity to consider the trade-off acceptable.

   o Facility, where the
      primary IETF guest room allocations are negotiated and IETF SSIDs
      are in use.

3.1.  Venue City Criteria

   These concern basic aspects of a candidate city:

   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | Criteria                                             | Required   |
   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | Travel to the venue Venue is reasonably acceptable based on cost,     | "Mandatory |
   | time, and burden for participants traveling from     | "          |
   | multiple regions. It is anticipated that the burden  |            |
   | borne will be generally shared over the course of the year.  [Important]

      Editor query:    Resolve Important vs. Mandatory.  d/

   o    |            |
   | multiple years.                                      |            |
   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | The venue Venue is assessed as favorable for obtaining a   | "Mandatory |
   | host and 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.
      [Important]

      Editor query:    Resolve Important vs. Mandatory.  d/

   o                |            |
   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | It is possible to enter into a multi-event contract  | "Desired"  |
   | with the venue Venue to optimize meeting and attendee      |            |
   | benefits, i.e., reduce administrative costs and      |            |
   | reduce direct attendee costs, will be considered a   |            |
   | positive factor.  [Would Such a contract can be nice]

   o considered   |            |
   | after at least one IETF meeting has been held at the |            |
   | Venue.                                               |            |
   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | Travel barriers to entry, e.g., visa requirements    | "Mandatory |
   | that can limit participation, are acceptable to the  | "          |
   | IETF community.  [Important]

      Editor query:    Resolve Important vs. Mandatory.  d/

   o                                      |            |
   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | Economic, safety, and health risks associated with   | "Mandatory |
   | this venue Venue are acceptable to the IETF community.  [Important]

      Editor query:    Resolve Important vs. Mandatory.  d/

   o     | "          |
   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | Available travel issue assessments (such -- such as
      https://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/country.html) <https | "Mandatory |
   | ://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/country.htm | "          |
   | l> -- have been pointed out the IETF community.  [Important]

      Editor query:    Resolve Important vs. Mandatory.  d/      |            |
   | [[Editor's Note: This mostly concerns assessing the  |            |
   | problems getting visa's and making the assessment 3  |            |
   | years in advance. What can we do that is meaningful? |            |
   | Also, are there better citations to include? /d]]    |            |
   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+

3.2.  Basic Venue Criteria

      Alissa's comment: ( 3.3.2 bullets 1, 3, 4, 5, 6)

   o

   The Meeting Space IETF operates as an international organisational and adjusts to
   local requirements.  Facilities selected for IETF Meetings conform
   with local health, safety and accessibility laws and regulations.  A
   useful discussion of related considerations in evaluating this
   criterion is at: <http://www.sigaccess.org/welcome-to-
   sigaccess/resources/accessible-conference-guide/>
   Editor's Note:    In the spirit of the 'international' focus, we need
      a comprehensive document that is similar to the one cited, but
      without a national focus.  The current reference is US-specific.
      /d

   In addition:

   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | Criteria                                            | Required    |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Facility is adequate in size and layout to      | "Mandatory" |
   | accommodate the meeting and foster participant      |             |
   | interaction.  [Mandatory]

   o                                        |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The cost of guest rooms, meeting space, meeting     | "Mandatory" |
   | food and beverage is affordable (within affordable, within the norms   |             |
   | of business travel).  [Mandatory]

   o travel.                                 |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The economics of the venue Venue allow the meeting to be  | "Mandatory" |
   | net cash
      positive [Mandatory].

   o  An Optimal positive.                                  |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Facility for permits holding an IETF meeting is held under  | "Desired"   |
   | "One Roof",
      that Roof". That is, qualified meeting space and    |             |
   | guest rooms are available in the same facility.  [Desired]

   o  An Optimal     |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Facility permits easy wheelchair access.        | "Mandatory" |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Facility for an IETF meeting is accessible by people with           | "Important" |
   | disabilities.

      *  The selected facility conforms with local accessibility laws
         and regulations [Mandatory]

      *  http://www.sigaccess.org/welcome-to-sigaccess/resources/
         accessible-conference-guide/ provides a definition of related
         considerations that shall be used in evaluating this criterion.
         [Desired]                                       |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+

3.3.  Technical Services and Operations Criteria

      Alissa's comment: ( 3.3.3)

   o
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | Criteria                                            | Required    |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Venue's Facility's support technologies and services -- | "Mandatory" |
   | network, audio-
      video, etc., audio-video, etc. -- are sufficient for    |             |
   | the anticipated activities at the meeting, or the venue   |             |
   | Venue is willing to add such infrastructure or      |             |
   | these support technologies and services might be    |             |
   | provided by a third party, all at no -- or at an    |             |
   | acceptable -- cost to the IETF.  [Mandatory]

   o                     |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The meeting venue must permit Facility directly provides, or permits and facilitate      | "Mandatory" |
   | facilitates, the delivery of a high performance,    |             |
   | robust, unfiltered and unmodified IETF Network.
      [Mandatory]

   o     |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The IETF hotel(s), which are one or more hotels in close proximity
      to the venue where the primary IETF room allocations are
      negotiated and the IETF SSIDs are in use, must Hotel(s) directly provide, or else permit  | "Mandatory" |
   | and facilitate, the delivery of a high performance, |             |
   | robust, unfiltered and unmodified Internet service  |             |
   | for the public areas and guest rooms.  This rooms; this service  |             |
   | is typically included in the cost of the room.  [Mandatory]

   o      |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The overflow hotels should provide reasonable, reliable,   | "Desired"   |
   | unfiltered Internet service for the public areas    |             |
   | and guest rooms.
      This rooms; this service is typically included in the    |             |
   | cost of the room.
      [Desired]                                   |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+

3.4.  Lodging Criteria

      Alissa's comment: ( 3.3.4)

   o
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | Criteria                                            | Required    |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The IETF hotel(s) Hotel(s) are within close proximity to     | "Mandatory" |
   | each other and the
      venue.  [Mandatory]

   o Venue.                           |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Guest Rooms guest rooms at the IETF hotel(s) Hotel(s) are sufficient | "Mandatory" |
   | in number to house 1/3 or more of projected meeting |             |
   | attendees.  [Mandatory]

   o  The Venue environs include budget hotels within convenient travel
      time, cost, and effort.  [Mandatory]

   o                                          |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | Overflow Hotels that can be placed under contract.  They typically
      must be contract,       | "Mandatory" |
   | within convenient travel time of the venue Venue and have at a |             |
   | variety of guest room rates.  [Mandatory]

   o                        |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Venue environs include budget hotels within     | "Mandatory" |
   | convenient travel time, cost, and effort.           |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The IETF Hotel(s) permit easy wheelchair access.    | "Mandatory" |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The IETF hotel(s) Hotel(s) are accessible by people with     | "Important" |
   | disabilities.

      *                                       |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The selected facility conforms with local accessibility laws
         and regulations [Mandatory]

      *  http://www.sigaccess.org/welcome-to-sigaccess/resources/
         accessible-conference-guide/ provides IETF Hotel should have a definition of related
         considerations social space that shall      | "Desired"   |
   | serves as a lounge, conducive to planned and        |             |
   | accidental meetings and chatting, as well as        |             |
   | working online. This is often an open bar,          |             |
   | restaurant, or seating area, preferably on the      |             |
   | ground/entrance floor, but can also be used in evaluating this criterion.
         [Desired] a meeting    |             |
   | room, arranged to facilitate communal interaction   |             |
   | among attendees.                                    |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+

3.5.  Food and Beverage Criteria

      Alissa's comment: ( 3.3.5)

   o
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | Criteria                                            | Required    |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Venue environs, which includes both onsite, and the as  | "Mandatory" |
   | well as areas within a reasonable walking distance, distance  |             |
   | or conveniently accessible by a short taxi, bus, or |             |
   | subway ride, has have convenient and inexpensive        |             |
   | choices for meals that can accommodate a wide range |             |
   | of dietary requirements.  [Mandatory]

   o                            |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Venue environs include grocery shopping that    | "Important" |
   | will accommodate a wide range of dietary            |             |
   | requirements, within a reasonable walking distance, |             |
   | or conveniently accessible by a short taxi, bus, or |             |
   | subway ride.  [Desired]                                        |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | A range of attendee's health-related and religion-  | "Mandatory" |
   | related dietary requirements can be satisfied with  |             |
   | robust and flexible onsite service or through       |             |
   | access to an adequate grocery.                      |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+

4.  Venue Selection Process

      Alissa's comment: ( 2) Roles

   The formal structure of IETF administrative support functions is
   documented in BCP 101 [RFC4071][RFC4371][RFC7691]. [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.

4.1.  The IETF Community

   While somewhat obvious to most, perhaps obvious, it is important to note that IETF meetings
   serve all those who contribute to the development of IETF
   RFCs. work of the IETF.  This
   includes those who attend meetings, from newcomer to frequent
   attendee, to those who participate remotely, and to as well as those who don't do
   not attend but contribute to new RFCs.  Potential new contributors
   are also considered in the process.

   IETF consensus consensus, with respect to the this meeting venue 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 or to be reported as consensus.

4.2.  IESG and IETF Chair

   The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is a group comprised
   of comprises the IETF
   Area Directors and the IETF Chair.  The  Along with the IAB, the IESG is
   responsible for the management, along with the IAB, management 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, Chair, among other things, relays
   these IESG-determined policies to the IAOC.  The IETF Chair is also a
   member of the IAOC.

4.3.  The Internet Society

   The

   With respect to IETF meetings, the Internet Society (ISOC) executes (ISOC):

   o  Executes all venue Venue contracts on behalf of the IETF at the request
      of the IAOC; solicits IAOC

   o  Solicits meeting sponsorships;
   collects sponsorships

   o  Collects all meeting-related revenues, including registration
      fees, sponsorships, hotel commissions, and other miscellaneous revenues.
      revenues

   ISOC also provides accounting services, such as invoicing and monthly
   financial statements.  The meetings budget is managed by the IAD.

4.4.  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.

4.5.  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
   Venue contract negotiation.  The IETF Secretariat is part of the IASA
   under the management of the IAD.

4.6.  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 Venue contract negotiation, and
   coordinating contract execution with ISOC.

4.7.  IAOC Meeting Committee  The meetings budget is
   managed by the IAD.

4.7.  IAOC Meeting Committee is generally referred to as the Meetings
   Committee.

   The fundamental purpose of the committee Meetings Committee is to participate
   in the
   venue 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. at: <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.

4.8.

5.  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
   the Steps

   The following schedule as is a guideline:

   Phase 1:  Identification guideline sequence for identifying and Preliminary Investigation contracting
   a Venue.

5.1.  Identification

   Four years out, a process identifies cities that might be candidates
   for meetings and
      initiates site selection.

      A. meetings:

   a.  The IAOC selects regions and dates for meetings.

      B.  Meeting

   b.  A list of target cities per region are is provided to the
          Secretariat based upon Meetings Committee input and, if known,
       Secretariat, with host preferences.

      C. preferences, if known.

   c.  Potential venues in preferred cities are identified and
          investigated, receive
       preliminary investigation, including reviews of Official Advisory
       Sources, consultation with specialty travel services, frequent
       travelers and local contacts to identify possible barriers to
       holding a successful meeting in the target cities.

      D.

   d.  Investigated cities and findings are provided by the Secretariat
       to the Meetings Committee for further review.  Meetings Committee
       makes a recommendation to the IAOC of investigated/
          target investigated/target cities
       to consider further as well as issues identified and the results
       of research conducted.

   Phase 2:  Community

5.2.  Consultation

   Preliminary question:

   a.  The IAOC asks the community whether there are any barriers to
       holding a successful meeting in any of the target cities.
       Community responses are reviewed and concerns investigated.  The IAOC shall
      maintain

   b.  On a public web page that page, the IAOC lists all target candidate cities, when
       community input was solicited, and summarized a summarization of the review
       results.
      Once review results are published the

   c.  The IAOC then provides a list of vetted cities to the Meetings
       Committee to pursue as potential meeting locations.

   Phase 3:  Vetted Venues Evaluated for Site

5.3.  Qualification Visit

      A.

   Visit:

   a.  Secretariat Assesses assesses "vetted" target cities to determine
       availability and conformance to criteria

      B. criteria.

   b.  Meetings Committee approves potential cities for site
       qualification visit.

      C.

   c.  Site qualification visits are arranged by Secretariat and
       preliminary negotiations are undertaken with selected potential sites

      D.
       sites.

   d.  Site qualification visit is conducted using the checklist from
          https://iaoc.ietf.org/meetings-committee/venue-selection.html;
          The
       <https://iaoc.ietf.org/meetings-committee/venue-selection.html>;
       the site visit team prepares a site report and discusses it with
       the Meetings Committee.

   Phase 4:  Qualified Venues Evaluated for Contract

5.4.  Negotiation

   2.75 - 3 years out, initiate contract negotiations.

      A. negotiations:

   a.  The Meetings Committee reviews the venue Venue options based on
          venue Venue
       selection criteria and recommends a venue Venue to the IAOC.  Only
       options that meet all Mandatory labeled criteria may might be
       recommended.

      B.

   b.  IAOC selects a venue Venue for contracting as well as a back-up
       contracting venue, Venue, if available.

      C.

   c.  Secretariat negotiates with selected venue. Venue.  IAD reviews contract
       and requests IAOC and ISOC approval of contract and authority for
       Secretariat to execute contract on ISOC's behalf.

      D.

   d.  Contracts are executed.

   Phase 5:  Evaluation and Contingency Planning
      3

5.5.  Final Check

   ~3 Months Prior prior to the Meeting, the meeting site is checked for continued
   availability and conformance to expectations.

      A.

   a.  Secretariat reviews current status of the contracted meeting
       location to confirm there is no change in the location status and
       to identify possible new barriers to holding a successful meeting
       in the contracted city and provides findings to the IAOC.

      B.

   b.  IAOC considers the information provided and evaluates the risk -
       if significant risk is identified, the Contingency Planning Flow
       Chart (https://iaoc.ietf.org/meetings-committee/venue-
          selection.html) (<https://iaoc.ietf.org/meetings-committee/venue-
       selection.html>) is followed, if current risk is not significant,
       the situation is monitored through the meeting to ensure there is
       no significant change.

5.

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.

5.1.

6.1.  Venue Selection Process

   The process of selecting a venue Venue is described below and is based on
   https://iaoc.ietf.org/venue-selection.html.

5.1.1.
   <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?  moved to Section 2.1

   Inclusiveness:  Moved to Section 2.1.

   Internet Access:  Moved to Section 2.1.

   Focus:  Moved to Section 2.1.

   Economics:  Moved to Section 2.1.

   Political considerations:  moved to Section 2.2 and reworded per
      Alissa's suggested text.

5.1.2.

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. <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, <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,
   Venue, the more stress imposed on the qualification process, and the
   greater the risk of not finding a suitable venue 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.

5.1.3.

6.1.3.  Venue Selection Criteria

   Heading text moved to Section 3.

5.1.3.1.

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 Venue to optimize meeting and
      attendee benefits, i.e., reduce administrative costs and reduce
      direct attendee costs.  [Would be nice]

5.1.3.2.

6.1.3.2.  Basic Venue Criteria

   o  moved to Section 3.2

   o  The venue Facility and hotels Hotels can be put under contract.  The subsequent
      failure to put a selected venue Venue under contract will result in a
      re-evaluation of the venues and selection for the meeting.
      [Mandatory]

5.1.4.

6.1.4.  Venue Selection Phases

5.1.5.

6.1.5.  Experience Notes

   a.  The foregoing process works with reasonable certainty in North
       America and Europe.

   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
       advance of the meeting.  While the IETF will have the first
       option for the dates, for reasons not completely understood
       contracts won't be executed.

5.2.

6.2.  Transparency

   BCP 101 requires transparency in IASA process and contracts, and
   thereby of the meetings committee.  BCP 101 also states that the IAOC
   approves what information is to remain confidential.  Therefore any
   information produced by the meetings committee or related to meetings
   that individuals believe is confidential, e.g., venue contracts, must
   be confirmed to be confidential by the IAOC.

6.

7.  IANA Considerations

   This memo asks the IANA for no new parameters.

7.

8.  Security Considerations

   This note proposes no protocols, and therefore no new protocol
   insecurities.

8.

9.  Privacy Considerations

   This note reveals no personally identifying information apart from
   its authorship.

9.

10.  Acknowledgements

   This document was originally assembled and edited by Fred Baker.
   Additional commentary came from Jari Arkko, Scott Bradner, and Alissa
   Cooper.  It was discussed on mtgvenue@ietf.org.

10.

11.  References

10.1.

11.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.krishnan-ietf-meeting-policy]
              Krishnan, S., "High level guidance for the meeting policy
              of the IETF", draft-krishnan-ietf-meeting-policy-01 (work
              in progress), July 2016.

   [MeetingNet]
              O'Donoghue, K., Martin, J., Elliott, C., and J. Jaeggli,
              "IETF Meeting Network Requirements", WEB
              https://iaoc.ietf.org/ietf-network-requirements.html.

   [RFC2026]  Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
              3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, DOI 10.17487/RFC2026, October 1996,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2026>.

   [RFC4071]  Austein, R., Ed. and B. Wijnen, Ed., "Structure of the
              IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA)", BCP 101,
              RFC 4071, DOI 10.17487/RFC4071, April 2005,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4071>.

   [RFC4371]  Carpenter, B., Ed. and L. Lynch, Ed., "BCP 101 Update for
              IPR Trust", BCP 101, RFC 4371, DOI 10.17487/RFC4371,
              January 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4371>.

   [RFC7691]  Bradner, S., Ed., "Updating the Term Dates of IETF
              Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) Members",
              BCP 101, RFC 7691, DOI 10.17487/RFC7691, November 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7691>.

10.2.

11.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.barnes-healthy-food]
              Barnes, M., "Healthy Food and Special Dietary Requirements
              for IETF meetings", draft-barnes-healthy-food-07 (work in
              progress), July 2013.

   [RFC3935]  Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF",
              BCP 95, RFC 3935, October 2004.

Appendix A.  Change Log

   2016-01-12:  Initial version

   2016-01-21:  Update to reflect https://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/
      VenueSelectionCriteriaJan2016.pdf and
      https://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/VenueSelectionProcess11Jan16.pdf,
      accessed from https://iaoc.ietf.org/private/privatemeetings.html.

   2016-02-23:  Reorganize and capture IAOC Meetings Committee
      discussions.

   2016-03-03:  Final from Design Team.

   2016-03-17:  First update incorporating mtgvenue@ietf.org comments

   2016-05-20  Updated in accordance with editing by Laura Nugent, Dave
      Crocker, Lou Berger, Fred Baker, and others.

   posting as working group draft  August 2, 2016

   Reorganized per Alissa Cooper outline  Work in progress.  In
      addition, contributors were re-organized to be authors.

   2016-10-28  Editor changeover.  Further alignment with guidance by
      Alissa Cooper, Andrew Sullivan and the mgtvenue mtgvenue working group.
      Many various changes.

   2016-11-16  Extensive editorial, format and polishing pass.  A few
      substance changes, including food section.

   2016-11-30  Additions based on working group meeting and off-list
      discussions; more editorial and format hacking.

Authors' Addresses

   Ray Pelletier
   Internet Society

   Email: rpelletier@isoc.org

   Laura Nugent
   Association Management Solutions

   Email: lnugent@amsl.com

   Dave Crocker (editor)
   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 (editor)
   Santa Barbara, California  93117
   USA

   Email: FredBaker.IETF@gmail.com