draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-12.txt   draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-13.txt 
mtgvenue E. Lear, Ed. mtgvenue E. Lear, Ed.
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems Internet-Draft Cisco Systems
Intended status: Best Current Practice February 2, 2018 Intended status: Best Current Practice April 2, 2018
Expires: August 6, 2018 Expires: October 4, 2018
IETF Plenary Meeting Venue Selection Process IETF Plenary Meeting Venue Selection Process
draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-12 draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-13
Abstract Abstract
The IASA has responsibility for arranging IETF plenary meeting Venue The IASA has responsibility for arranging IETF plenary meeting Venue
selection and operation. This document details the IETF's Meeting selection and operation. This memo specifies IETF community
Venue Selection Process from the perspective of the community's requirements for meeting venues, including hotels and meeting room
goals, criteria and thought processes. It points to additional space. It directs the IASA to make available additional process
process documents on the IAOC Web Site that go into further detail documents around that describe the current meeting selection process.
and are subject to change with experience.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 6, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on October 4, 2018.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 13 skipping to change at page 2, line 11
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Venue Selection Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Venue Selection Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Core Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. Core Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Venue Selection Non-Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2. Venue Selection Non-Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Meeting Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. Meeting Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Mandatory Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1. Mandatory Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Important Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2. Important Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. Other Consideraitons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.3. Other Consideraitons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Venue Selection Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4. Documentation Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1. IETF Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2. IESG and IETF Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3. The Internet Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.4. IETF Administrative Oversight Committee . . . . . . . . . 11 8. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.5. IETF Administrative Support Activity . . . . . . . . . . 11 9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.6. IETF Administrative Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.7. IAOC Meetings Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Venue Selection Steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.1. Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2. Consultation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.3. Qualification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.4. Negotiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.5. Late Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Internet Administrative Support Activity (IASA) has The Internet Administrative Support Activity (IASA) has
responsibility for arranging IETF plenary meeting venue selection and responsibility for arranging IETF plenary meeting venue selection and
operation. The purpose of this document is to guide the IASA in operation. The purpose of this document is to guide the IASA in
their selection of regions, cities, facilities, and hotels. The IASA their selection of regions, cities, facilities, and hotels. The IASA
applies this guidance at different points in the process in an applies this guidance at different points in the process in an
attempt to faithfully meet the requirements of the IETF community. attempt to faithfully meet the requirements of the IETF community.
We specify a set of general criteria for venue selection and several We specify a set of general criteria for venue selection and several
requirements for transparency and community consultation. requirements for transparency and community consultation.
It remains the responsibility of the IASA to apply their best It remains the responsibility of the IASA to apply their best
judgment. The IASA accepts input and feedback both during the judgment. The IASA accepts input and feedback both during the
consultation process and later (for instance when there are changes consultation process and later (for instance when there are changes
in the situation at a chosen location). Any appeals remain subject in the situation at a chosen location). Any appeals remain subject
to the provisions of BCP101 [RFC4071]. As always, the community is to the provisions of BCP101 [RFC4071]. As always, the community is
encouraged to provide direct feedback to the Nominations Committee encouraged to provide direct feedback to the Nominations Committee
(NOMCOM), Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), and IAB (NOMCOM), Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), and IAB
regarding the discharge of the IETF Administrative Oversight regarding the discharge of the IASA's performance.
Committee's performance.
Four terms describe the places for which the IETF contracts services: Four terms describe the places for which the IETF contracts services:
Venue: Venue:
This is an umbrella term for the city, meeting resources and guest This is an umbrella term for the city, meeting resources and guest
room resources. room resources.
Facility: Facility:
The building that houses meeting rooms and associated resources. The building that houses meeting rooms and associated resources.
It may also house an IETF Hotel. It may also house an IETF Hotel.
skipping to change at page 5, line 20 skipping to change at page 5, line 4
Economics: Economics:
Meeting attendees participate as individuals. While many are Meeting attendees participate as individuals. While many are
underwritten by employers or sponsors, many are self-funded. In underwritten by employers or sponsors, many are self-funded. In
order to reduce participation costs and travel effort, we order to reduce participation costs and travel effort, we
therefore seek locations that provide convenient budget therefore seek locations that provide convenient budget
alternatives for food and lodging, and which minimize travel alternatives for food and lodging, and which minimize travel
segments from major airports to the Venue. Within reason, budget segments from major airports to the Venue. Within reason, budget
should not be a barrier to accommodation. should not be a barrier to accommodation.
Least Astonishment and Openness: Least Astonishment and Openness:
Regular participants should not be surprised by meeting Venue Regular participants should not be surprised by meeting Venue
selections, particularly when it comes to locales. To avoid selections, particularly when it comes to locales. To avoid
surprise, the venue selection process, as with all other IETF surprise, the venue selection process, as with all other IETF
processes, should be as open as practicable. It should be processes, should be as open as practicable. It should be
possible for the community to engage early to express its views on possible for the community to engage early to express its views on
prospective selections, so that the community, the IETF prospective selections, so that the community and the IASA can
Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC), and Internet exchange views as to appropriateness long before a venue contract
Administrative Director (IAD) can exchange views as to is considered.
appropriateness long before a venue contract is considered.
2.2. Venue Selection Non-Objectives 2.2. Venue Selection Non-Objectives
IETF meeting Venues are not selected or declined with the explicit IETF meeting Venues are not selected or declined with the explicit
purposes of: purposes of:
Politics: Politics:
Endorsing or condemning particular countries, political paradigms, Endorsing or condemning particular countries, political paradigms,
laws, regulations, or policies. laws, regulations, or policies.
skipping to change at page 6, line 20 skipping to change at page 5, line 49
3.1. Mandatory Criteria 3.1. Mandatory Criteria
If criteria in this subsection cannot be met, a particular location If criteria in this subsection cannot be met, a particular location
is unacceptable for selection, and the IASA MUST NOT enter into a is unacceptable for selection, and the IASA MUST NOT enter into a
contract. Should the IASA learn that a location no longer can meet a contract. Should the IASA learn that a location no longer can meet a
mandatory requirement after having entered into a contract, it will mandatory requirement after having entered into a contract, it will
inform the community and address the matter on a case by case basis. inform the community and address the matter on a case by case basis.
o The Facility MUST provide sufficient space in an appropriate o The Facility MUST provide sufficient space in an appropriate
layout to accommodate the expected number of people to attend that layout to accommodate the expected number of participants,
meeting. leadership, and support staff to attend that meeting.
o The Facility and IETF Hotels MUST provide wheelchair access to o The Facility and IETF Hotels MUST provide wheelchair access to
accommodate the number of people who are anticipated to require accommodate the number of people who are anticipated to require
it. it.
o It MUST be possible to provision Internet Access to the Facility o It MUST be possible to provision Internet Access to the Facility
and IETF Hotels that allows local attendees to utilize the and IETF Hotels that allows those attending in person to utilize
Internet for all their IETF, business, and day to day needs; as the Internet for all their IETF, business, and day to day needs;
well as sufficient bandwidth and access for remote attendees. as well as sufficient bandwidth and access for remote attendees.
This includes, but is not limited to, native and unmodified IPv4 This includes, but is not limited to, native and unmodified IPv4
and IPv6 connectivity, global reachability, and no additional and IPv6 connectivity, global reachability, and no additional
limitation that would materially impact their Internet use. To limitation that would materially impact their Internet use. To
ensure availability, it MUST be possible to provision redundant ensure availability, it MUST be possible to provision redundant
paths to the Internet. paths to the Internet.
3.2. Important Criteria 3.2. Important Criteria
The criteria in this subsection are not mandatory, but are still The criteria in this subsection are not mandatory, but are still
highly significant. It may be necessary to trade one or more of highly significant. It may be necessary to trade one or more of
skipping to change at page 7, line 41 skipping to change at page 7, line 21
assurance that they are in compliance with local health, safety and assurance that they are in compliance with local health, safety and
accessibility laws and regulations, and will remain in compliance accessibility laws and regulations, and will remain in compliance
throughout our stay. throughout our stay.
In addition: In addition:
o There are sufficient places (e.g., a mix of hallways, bars, o There are sufficient places (e.g., a mix of hallways, bars,
meeting rooms, and restaurants) for people to hold ad hoc meeting rooms, and restaurants) for people to hold ad hoc
conversations and group discussions in the combination of spaces conversations and group discussions in the combination of spaces
offered by the facilities, hotels and bars/restaurants in the offered by the facilities, hotels and bars/restaurants in the
surrounding area, within walking distance (5-10'). surrounding area, within walking distance (5-10 minutes).
o The cost of guest rooms, meeting space, meeting food and beverage o The cost of guest rooms, meeting space, meeting food and beverage
is affordable, within the norms of business travel. is affordable, within the norms of business travel.
o The Facility is accessible or reasonable accommodations can be o The Facility is accessible or reasonable accommodations can be
made to allow access by people with disabilities. made to allow access by people with disabilities.
3.2.3. Technical Meeting Needs 3.2.3. Technical Meeting Needs
The following criteria relate to technical meeting needs. The following criteria relate to technical meeting needs.
skipping to change at page 8, line 32 skipping to change at page 8, line 9
The following criteria relate to IETF Hotels. The following criteria relate to IETF Hotels.
o The IETF Hotel(s) are within close proximity to each other and the o The IETF Hotel(s) are within close proximity to each other and the
Facility. Facility.
o The guest rooms at the IETF Hotel(s) are sufficient in number to o The guest rooms at the IETF Hotel(s) are sufficient in number to
house 1/3 or more of projected meeting attendees. house 1/3 or more of projected meeting attendees.
o Overflow Hotels can be placed under contract, within convenient o Overflow Hotels can be placed under contract, within convenient
travel time of the Facility and at a variety of guest room rates. travel time to and from the Facility and at a variety of guest
room rates.
o The Facility environs include budget hotels within convenient o The Facility environs include budget hotels within convenient
travel time, cost, and effort. travel time, cost, and effort.
o The IETF Hotel(s) are accessible by people with disabilities. o The IETF Hotel(s) are accessible by people with disabilities.
While we mandate wheelchair accessibility, other forms are While we mandate wheelchair accessibility, other forms are
important, and should be provided to the extent possible, based on important, and should be provided to the extent possible, based on
anticipated needs of the community. anticipated needs of the community.
o At least one IETF Hotel or the Facility has a space for use as a o At least one IETF Hotel or the Facility has a space for use as a
skipping to change at page 10, line 5 skipping to change at page 9, line 25
contract will either reduce administrative costs, reduce direct contract will either reduce administrative costs, reduce direct
attendee costs, or both. attendee costs, or both.
o Particularly when we are considering a city for the first time, it o Particularly when we are considering a city for the first time, it
is desirable to have someone participate in the site visit who is is desirable to have someone participate in the site visit who is
familiar with both the locale and the IETF. Such a person can familiar with both the locale and the IETF. Such a person can
provide guidance regarding safety, location of local services, and provide guidance regarding safety, location of local services, and
understanding best ways to get to and from the Venue, and local understanding best ways to get to and from the Venue, and local
customs, as well as identify how our requirements are met. customs, as well as identify how our requirements are met.
4. Venue Selection Roles 4. Documentation Requirements
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 describes the roles involved in meeting venue selection
(e.g., not who does what at the meetings). It is anticipated that
those roles will evolve. The IASA MUST keep the community informed
in this regard, but MAY do so without updating this memo.
4.1. IETF 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 in person, from newcomer to
frequent attendee, to those who participate remotely, as well as
those who do not attend but who also contribute their ideas.
Potential new contributors are also considered in the process.
Participants have a responsibility to express their views about
venues early and often, by responding to surveys or other
solicitations from IASA functions, and by initiating fresh input as
the Participant becomes aware of changes in venues that have been
reviewed. 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.
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) or the
IETF Secretariat on ISOC's behalf:
o Executes all Venue contracts on behalf of the IETF at the request
of the IASA
o Solicits meeting sponsorships
o Collects all meeting-related revenues, including registration
fees, sponsorships, hotel commissions, and other miscellaneous
revenues
ISOC sees to the provisioning and oversight of 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 and IETF Secretariat to work with the Internet
Society to write the relevant contracts. It gives final approval to
the IETF meetings calendar. In cooperation with the IAD, the IAOC
takes necessary actions to ensure that the IASA 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) performs the meeting
selection process under the oversight of the IAOC. The IETF
Secretariat is under contract to support 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 IASA to ensure the timely execution of the meeting process. This
includes participating in the IAOC Meetings Committee and ensuring
its efforts are documented, overseeing Secretariat contract
negotiations with the Venue, and coordinating contract execution with
ISOC. The IAD manages the meetings budget.
4.7. IAOC Meetings 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 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 sequence is used by the IAOC to select venues. Unless
otherwise stated below, the IAOC may evolve these steps over time
without updating this document.
5.1. Identification
Four years out,the IASA identifies cities that might be candidates
for meetings, making use of the Secretariat as they deem appropriate.
For example:
a. The IASA selects regions, cities, 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 IASA of investigated/target cities
to consider further as well as issues identified and the results
of research conducted.
5.2. Consultation
The IASA MUST consult the community about potential new venues prior
to booking. The timing and means by which it does so may vary over
time, but MUST include references to any notable travel risks. The
consultation may overlap with the previous step (identification).
For example:
a. The IAOC asks the community whether there are any barriers to
holding a successful meeting in any of the target cities in the
set.
b. Community responses are reviewed and concerns investigated by the
Meetings Committee. The results together with recommendations
for whether each city should be considered as 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 city is to be considered
as a potential meeting location.
e. The Meetings Committee pursues potential meeting locations based
on the posted list of cities 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 along
the lines of <https://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/
PreQualSpecifications-19Oct2017.pdf>; 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. The
Meetings Committee will not recommend an option unless it meets
all Mandatory criteria.
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.
e. The venue is announced. At this time, the announcement MUST
include any notable economic, health, or safety risks or
references thereto.
5.5. Late Changes
If at any time after a contract is signed the IASA learns The IETF Community works best when it is best informed. This memo
circumstances have changed such that it is not certain that Important does not specify processes nor who has responsibility for fulfilling
or Mandatory criteria can be met by a Venue, the IASA MUST reconsider our requirements for meetings. Nevertheless, both of these aspects
the selection. A description of how reconsideration currently takes are important. Therefore, the IASA SHALL publicly document and keep
place is found in <https://iaoc.ietf.org/meetings- current both a list of roles and responsibilities relating to IETF
committee/documents/IETF-VenueSelectionID- meetings, as well as the selection processes they use in order to
ContingencyPlanningFlowChart-2016.pdf>. The IASA will gauge the cost fulfill the requirements of the community.
of making a change against the ability of the IETF to conclude a
successful meeting, and make a final determination based on their
best judgment. When there is enough time to do so, the IASA is
expected to consult the community about changes.
6. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
This memo asks the IANA for no new parameters. This memo asks the IANA for no new parameters.
[The RFC-Editor may remove this section prior to publicaiton.] [The RFC-Editor may remove this section prior to publicaiton.]
7. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
This note proposes no protocols, and therefore no new protocol This note proposes no protocols, and therefore no new protocol
insecurities. insecurities.
8. Privacy Considerations 7. Privacy Considerations
This note reveals no personally identifying information apart from
its authorship.
[The RFC-Editor may remove this section prior to publication.] Different places have different constraints on individual privacy.
The requirements in this memo are intended to provide for some
limited protections that attendees can apply. As meetings are
announced, IASA SHALL inform the IETF of any limitations to privacy
they have become aware of in their investigations. For example,
participants would be informed of any regulatory authentication or
logging requirements. This note reveals no personally identifying
information apart from its authorship.
9. Contributors 8. Contributors
The following people provided substantial text contributions to this The following people provided substantial text contributions to this
memo: memo:
Fred Baker Fred Baker
Email: fred.ietf@gmail.com Email: fred.ietf@gmail.com
Fred originated this work. Fred originated this work.
Ray Pelletier Ray Pelletier
skipping to change at page 15, line 27 skipping to change at page 10, line 37
Email: lberger@labn.net Email: lberger@labn.net
Ole Jacobsen Ole Jacobsen
The Internet Protocol Journal The Internet Protocol Journal
EMail: olejacobsen@me.com EMail: olejacobsen@me.com
Jim Martin Jim Martin
INOC INOC
Email: jim@inoc.com Email: jim@inoc.com
10. Acknowledgements 9. Acknowledgements
Additional contributions came from Jari Arkko, Scott Bradner, Alissa Additional contributions came from Jari Arkko, Scott Bradner, Alissa
Cooper, Dave Crocker, Jordi Palet Martinez, Andrew Sullivan, and Cooper, Dave Crocker, Jordi Palet Martinez, Andrew Sullivan, and
other participants in the mtgvenue working group. Those listed in other participants in the mtgvenue working group. Those listed in
this section or as contributors may or may not agree with the content this section or as contributors may or may not agree with the content
of this memo. of this memo.
11. References 10. References
11.1. Normative References
[RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 10.1. Normative References
3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, DOI 10.17487/RFC2026, October 1996,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2026>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC4071] Austein, R., Ed. and B. Wijnen, Ed., "Structure of the [RFC4071] Austein, R., Ed. and B. Wijnen, Ed., "Structure of the
IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA)", BCP 101, IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA)", BCP 101,
RFC 4071, DOI 10.17487/RFC4071, April 2005, RFC 4071, DOI 10.17487/RFC4071, April 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4071>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4071>.
[RFC4371] Carpenter, B., Ed. and L. Lynch, Ed., "BCP 101 Update for 10.2. Informative References
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. Informative References
[MeetingNet] [MeetingNet]
O'Donoghue, K., Martin, J., Elliott, C., and J. Jaeggli, O'Donoghue, K., Martin, J., Elliott, C., and J. Jaeggli,
"IETF Meeting Network Requirements", WEB "IETF Meeting Network Requirements", WEB
https://iaoc.ietf.org/ietf-network-requirements.html. https://iaoc.ietf.org/ietf-network-requirements.html.
[RFC3935] Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF", [RFC3935] Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF",
BCP 95, RFC 3935, DOI 10.17487/RFC3935, October 2004, BCP 95, RFC 3935, DOI 10.17487/RFC3935, October 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3935>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3935>.
 End of changes. 24 change blocks. 
288 lines changed or deleted 59 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.46. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/