mtgvenue                                                    R. Pelletier
Internet-Draft                                          Internet Society
Intended status: Best Current Practice                         L. Nugent
Expires: June 3, July 2, 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.
                                                       November 30,
                                                       December 29, 2016

              IETF Plenary Meeting Venue Selection Process
          draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-03
          draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-04

Abstract

   The IAOC has responsibility for arranging IETF plenary meeting Venue
   selection and operation.  This 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 June 3, July 2, 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4   3
   2.  Venue Selection Objectives  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.1.  Core Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.2.  Venue Selection Non-Objectives  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Venue Selection Criteria  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.1.  Venue City Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.2.  Basic Venue Criteria  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.3.  Technical Services and Operations Criteria  . . . . . . .   8
     3.4.  Lodging Criteria  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     3.5.  Food and Beverage Criteria  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   4.  Venue Selection Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     4.1.  The  IETF Community Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     4.2.  IESG and IETF Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     4.3.  The Internet Society  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     4.4.  IETF Administrative Oversight Committee . . . . . . . . .  12
     4.5.  IETF Administrative Support Activity  . . . . . . . . . .  12  13
     4.6.  IETF Administrative Director  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12  13
     4.7.  IAOC Meeting Committee  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   5.  Venue Selection Steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     5.1.  Identification  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     5.2.  Consultation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     5.3.  Qualification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     5.4.  Negotiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14  15
     5.5.  Final Check . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   6.  Text carried forward  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     6.1.  Venue Selection Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     6.2.  Transparency  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   8.  16
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   9.  16
   8.  Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   10.  16
   9.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   11.  16
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     11.1.  16
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     11.2.  16
     10.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19  17
   Appendix A.  Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19  17
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20  18

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 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
   refine it, based on community input.

1.2.  *** Post-Seoul Revisions ***

   Comments on this post-Seoul version:

   o  Many items input from the Sullivan draft have been included.

   o  A number of criteria had confusing wording and have been revised.
      The confusion was about the 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. IETF Participants.

1.2.  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; significant.
      It can possibly be traded off against other Important considerations. items, such that a Venue
      that meets more of these criteria is on the whole more preferable
      than another that meets less of these criteria.  Requirements
      classed as Important can also be balanced across Venue selections
      for multiple meetings.

   Desired:
      We would very much like to meet this requirement, but the failure
      to meet it will not disqualify a Venue.

2.  Venue Selection Objectives

2.1.  Core Values

   The

   Some IETF has some core values that pervade the selection process.
   The values  These often are not limited
   applicable to the multiple requirements listed in this document.  They
   are not limited to the following, but at minimum include
   them. include:

   Why do we meet?
      We meet to pursue the IETF's mission [RFC3935], partly by
      advancing the development of 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 attendees

      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. identity

   Where do we meet?
      We meet in different locations 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 Facility and hotels, Hotels,
      including overflow hotels.  We also need open network access
      available at high enough data rates, at the meeting Facility, to
      support our work, including the support of remote 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. Facility.

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

   Least Astonishment:
      Regular participants should not be surprised by meeting Venue
      selections, particularly when it comes to locales.  It should be
      possible for the community to engage early to express its views on
      prospective selections, so that the community, IAOC, and IAD can
      exchange views as to appropriateness long before a venue contract
      is considered.

2.2.  Venue Selection Non-Objectives

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

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

   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 list is not sorted in any particular order, but
   includes the committee's major considerations.

   The selection of a Venue always requires trade-offs.  There are no
   perfect venues.  For example, a site 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 might reduce its
   desirability in the presence of an alternative that does.

   Many of the does provide that
   single hotel.

   Some evaluation criteria are subjective.  This 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, as part of the process defined below in
   Section 5.

   Three terms describe the places for which the 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 Hotels:
      One or more hotels, in close proximity to the Facility, where the
      primary
      IETF guest room allocations are negotiated and IETF SSIDs are in
      use.

   Headquarters Hotel:
      The hotel designated as primary for the IETF meeting.  It include
      IETF SSIDs for networking, might be adjoining -- or even contain
      -- the meeting Facility -- and typically has the bulk of the hotel
      room allocations.

3.1.  Venue City Criteria

   These concern basic aspects of a candidate city:

   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | Criteria                                             | Required   |
   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | Consultation with the IETF Community has not         | "Mandatory |
   | produced concerns sufficient to disqualify the       | "          |
   | Venue.                                               |            |
   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | Travel to the Venue is 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    |            |
   | multiple years.                                      |            |
   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | The 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.                |            |
   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | It is possible to enter into a multi-event contract  | "Desired"  |
   | with the Venue to optimize meeting and attendee      |            |
   | benefits, i.e., reduce administrative costs and      |            |
   | reduce direct attendee costs, will be considered a   |            |
   | positive factor. Such a contract can be 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 acceptable.        | "          |
   | IETF community.                                      |            |
   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | Economic, safety, and health risks associated with   | "Mandatory |
   | this Venue are acceptable to the IETF community. acceptable.                           | "          |
   +------------------------------------------------------+------------+
   | Available travel issue assessments -- such as <https | "Mandatory |
   | ://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/country.htm | "          |
   | l> -- have been pointed out the IETF community.      |            |
   | [[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

   The 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: 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. US-
         specific. /d

   In addition:

   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | Criteria                                            | Required    |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Facility is adequate in size and layout to      | "Mandatory" |
   | accommodate the meeting and foster participant      |             |
   | interaction.                                        |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The cost of guest rooms, meeting space, meeting     | "Mandatory" |
   | food and beverage is affordable, within the norms   |             |
   | of business travel.                                 |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The economics of the Venue allow the meeting to be  | "Mandatory" |
   | net cash positive.                                  |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Facility permits holding an IETF meeting under  | "Desired"   |
   | "One Roof". That is, qualified meeting space and    |             |
   | guest rooms are available in the same facility.     |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Facility permits easy wheelchair access.        | "Mandatory" |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Facility is accessible by people with           | "Important" |
   | disabilities.                                       |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+

3.3.  Technical Services and Operations Criteria
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | Criteria                                            | Required    |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Facility's support technologies and services -- | "Mandatory" |
   | network, audio-video, etc. -- are sufficient for    |             |
   | the anticipated activities at the meeting, or the   |             |
   | Venue Facility 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.                     |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The Facility directly provides, or permits and      | "Mandatory" |
   | facilitates, the delivery of a high performance,    |             |
   | robust, unfiltered and unmodified IETF Network.     |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The IETF 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 service  |             |
   | is typically included in the cost of the room.      |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The overflow hotels provide reasonable, reliable,   | "Desired"   |
   | unfiltered Internet service for the public areas    |             |
   | and guest rooms; this service is included in the    |             |
   | cost of the room.                                   |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+

3.4.  Lodging Criteria
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | Criteria                                            | Required    |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The IETF Hotel(s) are within close proximity to     | "Mandatory" |
   | each other and the Venue. Facility.                        |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The guest rooms at the IETF Hotel(s) are sufficient | "Mandatory" |
   | in number to house 1/3 or more of projected meeting |             |
   | attendees.                                          |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | Overflow Hotels can be placed under contract,       | "Mandatory" |
   | within convenient travel time of the Venue Facility and at a   |             |
   | at a variety of guest room rates.                   |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | 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) are accessible by people with     | "Important" |
   | disabilities.                                       |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+
   | The IETF Headquarters Hotel should have has a social space that for use as  | "Desired" "Important" |
   | serves as a lounge, conducive to planned and accidental       |             |
   | accidental meetings and chatting, as well as        |             |
   | working online. This is often an open bar,   |             |
   | restaurant, or seating area, preferably on the There are tables with seating, convenient for small |             |
   | ground/entrance floor, but meetings with laptops. The can also be a meeting at an open bar or |             |
   | room, arranged to facilitate communal interaction casual restaurant. Preferably the lounge area is on |             |
   | among attendees. the path between the meeting rooms and the hotel    |             |
   | entrance, and is available all day and night.       |             |
   +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------+

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

   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.

4.1.  The  IETF Community Participants

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

   IETF consensus, with respect

   Participants have a responsibility to this meeting Venue selection process
   is judged via standard IETF process express their views about
   venues early and not often, by any responding to surveys or other means, e.g.,
   solicitations from the IAD or IAOC, and by initiating fresh input as
   the Participant becomes aware of changes in venues that have been
   reviews.  This permits those responsible for venue selection to be
   made aware of concerns relating to particular locations well in
   advance of having entered into contract discussions.

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

4.2.  IESG and IETF Chair

   The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) comprises the IETF
   Area Directors and the IETF Chair.  Along with the IAB, the IESG is
   responsible for the 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, 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

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

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

   o  Solicits meeting sponsorships

   o  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.

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.  In
   cooperation with the IAD, the IAOC takes necessary actions to ensure
   that it is aware of participant concerns about particular venues as
   early in the process as is feasible.

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 contract negotiation.  The IETF Secretariat is part of the IASA
   under the management of the IAD.  The IAD takes appropriate actions
   to solicit community input regarding both retrospective and
   prospective feedback from participants.

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 contract negotiation, and
   coordinating contract execution with ISOC.  The meetings budget is
   managed by the IAD.

4.7.  IAOC Meeting Committee

   The fundamental purpose of the Meetings 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 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.

5.  Venue Selection Steps

   The following is a guideline sequence for identifying and contracting
   a Venue.

5.1.  Identification

   Four years out, a process identifies cities that might be candidates
   for meetings:

   a.  The IAOC selects regions and dates for meetings.

   b.  A list of target cities per region is provided to the
       Secretariat, with host preferences, if known.

   c.  Potential venues in preferred cities are identified and 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.  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 cities
       to consider further as well as issues identified and the results
       of research conducted.

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. cities in the
       set.

   b.  Community responses are reviewed and concerns investigated.

   b. investigated by the
       Meetings Committee.  The results together with recommendations
       for whether each city should be considered as a potential meeting
       location is provided to the IAOC.

   c.  The IAOC identifies which cities are to be considered as a
       potential meeting location.

   d.  On a public web page, the IAOC lists all candidate cities, when
       community input was solicited, and if a summarization of the review
       results.

   c.  The IAOC then provides city is to be considered
       as a potential meeting location.

   e.  The Meetings Committee pursues potential meeting locations based
       on the posted list of vetted cities to the Meetings
       Committee to pursue that have been identified as a
       potential meeting locations.

5.3.  Qualification

   Visit:

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

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

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

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

5.4.  Negotiation

   2.75 - 3 years out, initiate contract negotiations:

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

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

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

   d.  Contracts are executed.

5.5.  Final Check

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

   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.  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>) is followed, if current risk is not significant,
       the situation is monitored through the meeting to ensure there is
       no significant change.

6.  Text carried forward  IANA Considerations

   This memo asks the IANA for no new parameters.

7.  Security Considerations

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

8.  Privacy Considerations

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

9.  Acknowledgements

   This document is being reorganized along an outline proposed was originally assembled and edited by Fred Baker.
   Additional commentary came from Jari Arkko, Scott Bradner, 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
   Cooper, Eliot Lear, 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?  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.

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 3.

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 3.2

   o  The Facility 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
       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.

6.2.  Transparency

   BCP 101 requires transparency other participants 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.

7.  IANA Considerations

   This memo asks the IANA for no new parameters.

8.  Security Considerations

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

9.  Privacy Considerations

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

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.

11.  References

11.1.

10.1.  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>.

11.2.

10.2.  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 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.

   2016-12-24  Various clarifying bits to provide some glue between the
      high-level 'objectives' and the detailed criteria and roles, per
      suggestions fronm Lear.  Editorial changes, per 12/27 response to
      Cooper.  Refined uses of 'facility' and 'venue', per 12/4 response
      to Carpenter; also added Carpenter 'lounge' text.  Moved community
      consultation to a separate criterion; removed 'acceptable to the
      IETF Community from the 2 entries that had it.  Removed Post-
      Seroul Revisions and Text Carried Forward.

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