Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process
draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process
mtgvenue E. Lear, Ed.
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems
Intended status: Best Current Practice June 14, 2018
Expires: December 16, 2018
IETF Plenary Meeting Venue Selection Process
draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-16
Abstract
The IASA has responsibility for arranging IETF plenary meeting Venue
selection and operation. This memo specifies IETF community
requirements for meeting venues, including hotels and meeting room
space. It directs the IASA to make available additional process
documents that describe the current meeting selection process.
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 https://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 December 16, 2018.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 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
(https://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.
Lear Expires December 16, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Venue Selection June 2018
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Venue Selection Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Core Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Venue Selection Non-Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Meeting Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Mandatory Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Important Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. Other Consideraitons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Documentation Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Introduction
The Internet Administrative Support Activity (IASA) has
responsibility for arranging IETF plenary meeting venue selection and
operation. The purpose of this document is to guide the IASA in
their selection of regions, cities, facilities, and hotels. The IASA
applies this guidance at different points in the process in an
attempt to faithfully meet the requirements of the IETF community.
We specify a set of general criteria for venue selection and several
requirements for transparency and community consultation.
It remains the responsibility of the IASA to apply their best
judgment. The IASA accepts input and feedback both during the
consultation process and later (for instance when there are changes
in the situation at a chosen location). Any appeals remain subject
to the provisions of BCP101 [RFC4071]. As always, the community is
encouraged to provide direct feedback to the Nominations Committee
(NOMCOM), Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), and IAB
regarding the discharge of the IASA's performance.
Four 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.
Lear Expires December 16, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Venue Selection June 2018
Facility:
The building that houses meeting rooms and associated resources.
It may also house an IETF Hotel.
IETF Hotels:
One or more hotels, in close proximity to the Facility, where the
IETF guest room block allocations are negotiated and where network
services managed by the IASA (e.g., the "IETF" SSID) are in use.
Overflow Hotels:
One or more hotels, usually in close proximity to the Facility,
where the IETF has negotiated a group rate for the purposes of the
meeting. Of particular note is that Overflow Hotels usually are
not connected to the IETF network and do not use network services
managed by the IASA.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119][RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
2. Venue Selection Objectives
2.1. Core Values
Some IETF values pervade the selection process. These often are
applicable to multiple requirements listed in this document. They
are not limited to the following, but at minimum include:
Why 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. Widespread participation
contributes to the diversity of perspectives represented in the
working sessions
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
inhibit, discourage, or prevent participants from attending
meetings, or failing that to distribute meeting locations such
Lear Expires December 16, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Venue Selection June 2018
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, ethnicity, religion, gender,
sexual orientation, national origin, citizenship, or gender
identity.
Where 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 participants
are based. Our regional location policy is articulated in
[I-D.ietf-mtgvenue-meeting-policy].
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 their corporate networks. "Unfiltered
access" in this case means that all forms of communication are
allowed. This includes, but is not limited to, access to
corporate networks via encrypted VPNs from the meeting Facility
and 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. Beyond this, we are the first users of our own
technology. Any filtering may cause a problem with that
technology development. In some cases, local laws may require
some filtering. We seek to avoid such locales without reducing
the pool of cities to an unacceptable level by stating a number of
criteria below, one mandatory and others important, to allow for
the case where local laws may require filtering in some
circumstances.
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, 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
Facility.[RFC6771]
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
Lear Expires December 16, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Venue Selection June 2018
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 and Openness:
Regular participants should not be surprised by meeting Venue
selections, particularly when it comes to locales. To avoid
surprise, the venue selection process, as with all other IETF
processes, should be as open as practicable. It should be
possible for the community to engage early to express its views on
prospective selections, so that the community and the IASA 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:
While the IETF strives to be as inclusive as possible both online
and in person, maximal meeting attendance in and of itself is not
a goal. It would defeat a key goal of meeting if active
contributors with differing points of view did not have the
opportunity to resolve their disagreements, no matter how full the
rooms.
Tourism:
Variety in site-seeing experiences.
3. Meeting Criteria
This section contains the criteria for IETF meetings. It is broken
down into three subsections: mandatory criteria, important criteria,
and other considerations, each as explained below.
3.1. Mandatory Criteria
If criteria in this subsection cannot be met, a particular location
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
mandatory requirement after having entered into a contract, it will
inform the community and address the matter on a case by case basis.
Lear Expires December 16, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Venue Selection June 2018
o The Facility MUST provide sufficient space in an appropriate
layout to accommodate the expected number of participants,
leadership, and support staff to attend that meeting.
o The Facility and IETF Hotels MUST provide wheelchair access to
accommodate the number of people who are anticipated to require
it.
o It MUST be possible to provision Internet Access to the Facility
and IETF Hotels that allows those attending in person to utilize
the Internet for all their IETF, business, and day to day needs;
as well as sufficient bandwidth and access for remote attendees.
This includes, but is not limited to, native and unmodified IPv4
and IPv6 connectivity, global reachability, and no additional
limitation that would materially impact their Internet use. To
ensure availability, it MUST be possible to provision redundant
paths to the Internet.
3.2. Important Criteria
The criteria in this subsection are not mandatory, but are still
highly significant. It may be necessary to trade one or more of
these criteria off against others. A Venue that meets more of these
criteria is on the whole preferable than another that meets fewer of
these criteria. Requirements classed as Important can also be
balanced across Venue selections for multiple meetings. When a
particular requirement in this section cannot be met, the IASA MUST
notify the community at the time of the venue announcement.
Furthermore, it may be appropriate for the IASA to assist those who,
as a result, have been inconvenienced in some way.
3.2.1. Venue City Criteria
o Travel to the Venue is acceptable based on cost, 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.
o The Venue is assessed as favorable for obtaining a host and
sponsors. That is, the Meeting is in a location that it is
possible and probable to find a host and sponsors.
o Travel barriers to entry, including visa requirements, are likely
to be such that an overwhelming majority of participants who wish
to do so can attend. The term "travel barriers" is to be read
broadly by the IASA in the context of whether a successful meeting
can be had.
Lear Expires December 16, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Venue Selection June 2018
o Economic, safety, and health risks associated with this Venue are
acceptable.
o The selection of the venue comports with
[I-D.ietf-mtgvenue-meeting-policy].
3.2.2. Basic Venue Criteria
The following requirements relate to the Venue and Facilities.
The IETF operates internationally and adjusts to local requirements.
Facilities selected for IETF Meetings SHALL have provided written
assurance that they are in compliance with local health, safety and
accessibility laws and regulations, and will remain in compliance
throughout our stay.
In addition:
o There are sufficient places (e.g., a mix of hallways, bars,
meeting rooms, and restaurants) for people to hold ad hoc
conversations and group discussions in the combination of spaces
offered by the facilities, hotels and bars/restaurants in the
surrounding area, within walking distance (5-10 minutes).
o The cost of guest rooms, meeting space, meeting food and beverage
is affordable, within the norms of business travel.
o The Facility is accessible or reasonable accommodations can be
made to allow access by people with disabilities.
3.2.3. Technical Meeting Needs
The following criteria relate to technical meeting needs.
o The Facility's support technologies and services -- network,
audio-video, etc. -- are sufficient for the anticipated activities
at the meeting, or the 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.
o The IETF Hotel(s) directly provide, or else permit and facilitate,
the delivery of a high performance, robust, unfiltered and
unmodified Internet service for the public areas and guest rooms,
and that this service be included in the cost of the room.
Lear Expires December 16, 2018 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Venue Selection June 2018
3.2.4. Hotel Needs
The following criteria relate to IETF Hotels.
o The IETF Hotel(s) are within close proximity to each other and the
Facility.
o The guest rooms at the IETF Hotel(s) are sufficient in number to
house 1/3 or more of projected meeting attendees.
o Overflow Hotels can be placed under contract, within convenient
travel time to and from the Facility and at a variety of guest
room rates.
o The Facility environs include budget hotels within convenient
travel time, cost, and effort.
o The IETF Hotel(s) are accessible by people with disabilities.
While we mandate wheelchair accessibility, other forms are
important, and should be provided to the extent possible, based on
anticipated needs of the community.
o At least one IETF Hotel or the Facility has a space for use as a
lounge, conducive to planned and ad hoc meetings and chatting, as
well as working online. There are tables with seating, convenient
for small meetings with laptops. These can be at an open bar or
casual restaurant. Preferably the lounge area is centrally
located, permitting easy access to participants.
3.2.5. Food and Beverage
The following criteria relate to food and beverage.
o The Facility environs, which includes both onsite, as well as
areas within a reasonable walking distance or conveniently
accessible by a short taxi ride or by local public transportation,
have convenient and inexpensive choices for meals that can
accommodate a wide range of dietary requirements.
o A range of attendee's health-related and religion-related dietary
requirements can be satisfied with robust and flexible onsite
service or through access to an adequate grocery.
o The Facility environs include grocery shopping that will
accommodate a wide range of dietary requirements, within a
reasonable walking distance, or conveniently accessible by a short
taxi, bus, or subway ride, from the Facility and IETF Hotels.
Lear Expires December 16, 2018 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Venue Selection June 2018
3.3. Other Consideraitons
The following considerations are desirable, but not as important as
the preceding requirements, and thus should not be traded off for
them.
o We have something of a preference for an IETF meeting to be under
"One Roof". That is, qualified meeting space and guest rooms are
available in the same facility.
o It is desirable for Overflow Hotels to provide reasonable,
reliable, unfiltered Internet service for the public areas and
guest rooms, and that this service be included in the cost of the
room.
o It is desirable to enter into a multi-event contract with the
Facility and IETF Hotels or associated hotel chains in case such a
contract will either reduce administrative costs, reduce direct
attendee costs, or both.
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
familiar with both the locale and the IETF. Such a person can
provide guidance regarding safety, location of local services, and
understanding best ways to get to and from the Venue, and local
customs, as well as identify how our requirements are met.
4. Documentation Requirements
The IETF Community works best when it is well informed. This memo
does not specify processes nor who has responsibility for fulfilling
our requirements for meetings. Nevertheless, both of these aspects
are important. Therefore, the IASA SHALL publicly document and keep
current both a list of roles and responsibilities relating to IETF
meetings, as well as the selection processes they use in order to
fulfill the requirements of the community.
5. IANA Considerations
This memo asks the IANA for no new parameters.
[The RFC-Editor may remove this section prior to publicaiton.]
6. Security Considerations
This note proposes no protocols, and therefore no new protocol
insecurities.
Lear Expires December 16, 2018 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Venue Selection June 2018
7. Privacy Considerations
Different places have different constraints on individual privacy.
The requirements in this memo are intended to provide for some
limited protections. 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.
8. Contributors
The following people provided substantial text contributions to this
memo:
Fred Baker
Email: fred.ietf@gmail.com
Fred originated this work.
Ray Pelletier
Email: Rpelletier13@gmail.com
Laura Nugent
Association Management Solutions
Email: lnugent@amsl.com
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
9. Acknowledgements
Additional contributions came from Jari Arkko, Scott Bradner, Alissa
Cooper, Dave Crocker, Jordi Palet Martinez, Andrew Sullivan, and
other participants in the mtgvenue working group. Those listed in
this section or as contributors may or may not agree with the content
of this memo.
Lear Expires December 16, 2018 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Venue Selection June 2018
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-mtgvenue-meeting-policy]
Krishnan, S., "High level guidance for the meeting policy
of the IETF", draft-ietf-mtgvenue-meeting-policy-06 (work
in progress), May 2018.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[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>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
10.2. Informative References
[RFC3935] Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF",
BCP 95, RFC 3935, DOI 10.17487/RFC3935, October 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3935>.
[RFC6771] Eggert, L. and G. Camarillo, "Considerations for Having a
Successful "Bar BOF" Side Meeting", RFC 6771,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6771, October 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6771>.
Appendix A. Change Log
[RFC Editor: Please remove this section prior to publication.]
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.
Lear Expires December 16, 2018 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Venue Selection June 2018
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.
2016-12-24 Address comments made on list by Stephen Farrell
<stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>. Minor text change in Section 5.
Replaced links in sections 5.3 and 5.5.
2017-03-12 Add openness comment as requested by Stephen Farrell.
Add statement about 4071 as proposed by Brian and modified by
Jari. Elaborated on what "unfiltered" means, based on discussion
between Eliot and Stephen. Preface to Section 5 as discussed
between Lou and Stephen. Slight editorial tweak to that by Eliot.
IETF operates internationally, as proposed by Brian.
2017-04-18 Add new introductory text. Sharpen mandatory definition.
Split first criteria into two, and reword them to be more
actionable. Remove net cash positive requirement. Change many
critera from Mandatory to Important. Remove consensus text.
Modify chapeau. Add some normative MUSTs in Section 5, and
Lear Expires December 16, 2018 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Venue Selection June 2018
restructure Section 5.5. A bunch of other stuff as well. Use
diff.
2017-05-14 Happy Mother's Day. This version removes the tabular
format of requirements, moves mandatory requirements up front,
adds a desiderata section, adds a mandatory filtering requirement,
consolidates introductory text, moves procedural requirements into
Section 5, removes the definition of Headquarters Hotel, removes
the MUST in late changes, and adds a desire for a local
participant in site selection.
2017-09-12 These are last call edits. Big change is around Internet
requirements. Also, address Andrew Sullivan comments, as well as
SM comments. Brian Carpenter big scrub on IAOC to IASA.
2017-10-20 Final edits from WGLC based on Laura Nugent's review.
Most are editorial for clarity. Also, remove large table and link
to the live copy.
2018-01-10 Changes based on AD review.
2018-02-02 Changes based on genart review and IETF last call.
2018-05-07 Several versions of changes. Based on reorg of meetings
committee, Section 4 and 5 moved out. Also, final LC comments
addressed. In particular: no smoking added. Reference to RFC8174
added. Reference to meeting policy doc added.
2018-05-11 Remove no smoking.
Author's Address
Eliot Lear (editor)
Cisco Systems
Richtistrasse 7
Wallisellen CH-8304
Switzerland
Phone: +41 44 878 9200
Email: lear@cisco.com
Lear Expires December 16, 2018 [Page 13]
