IAOC Meeting
2010-11-24 (24 Nov 2010) 15:00 UTC / 10:00 EST

Lynn St. Amour      [PRESENT]
Eric Burger         [PRESENT]
Marshall Eubanks    [PRESENT]
Bob Hinden          [PRESENT, Chair]
Russ Housley        [NOT PRESENT]
Ole Jacobsen        [PRESENT]
Olaf Kolkman        [NOT PRESENT]
Ray Pelletier       [PRESENT, IAD]
Henk Uijterwaal     [PRESENT] 

Karen O'Donoghue    [SCRIBE]

Draft IAOC Agenda 

1. Minutes
2. Day Pass Program 
3. Participant Assistance Program 
4. Meeting Companion Program 
5. Beijing Update 
6. IETF 83 Venue Selection 
7. Retreat - Dates & Location; Dec Call(s)

Bob Hinden called the meeting to order. There was some 
reordering of agenda items as the meeting progressed. 

1. Minutes
==========

There are no minutes available for approval at this 
meeting. There are two sets of outstanding minutes. We are 
close to the minutes process deadline for 2010-10-28. 

6. IETF 83 Venue Selection
==========================

Ray Pelletier went over the Meetings Committee's venue 
recommendation for IETF 83 in March 2012 including a brief 
overview of the full decision tree. This recommendation is 
subject to the negotiation of contracts. 

Henk Uijterwaal moved and Bob Hinden seconded the following 
resolution provided by Ray: 

    Resolved that the IAOC approves <confidential>
    <confidential> as the site for IETF 83 and requests the 
    Internet Society to negotiate agreements to effect that 
    selection for final IAOC review prior to execution.

NOTE: Standard practice is not to announce a meeting site 
until meeting space venue and primary hotel contracts are 
executed.

There were some questions clarifying hotel rates. Eric 
Burger asked about the meeting site cost (200,000 euros) 
and asked for comparable European venues. Ray pointed out 
recent examples of Prague (105,000 euros), Maastricht 
(175,000 euros), and Stockholm (300,000 euros). Bob Hinden 
asked Ray to summarize the room guarantee issue. Ray 
discussed the negotiation efforts ongoing that require 
minimum night guarantees AMS is still working on an optimal 
formula that doesn't expose a risk of not filling the 
guaranteed rooms. 

A roll call vote was taken:

Lynn St. Amour      [YES]
Eric Burger         [YES]
Marshall Eubanks    [YES]
Bob Hinden          [YES]
Ole Jacobsen        [YES]
Henk Uijterwaal     [YES] 

The motion passed unanimously.

2. Day Pass Program
===================

Ray Pelletier discussed the Day Pass Program experiment. 
Registration for Prague opens in December, and a decision 
on the program is required by 16 Dec IAOC Call. There has 
been fairly extensive discussion on the IAOC mailing list. 
The 47 Beijing Day Pass users are currently being surveyed. 

Some of the pros of the program include: 1) no significant 
negative impact on overall revenue; and 2) it is useful for 
the people coming for one day. Some cons of the program 
include: 1) it encourages attendees to drop in for a single 
session but discourages the full IETF experience, meetings 
in the hall, and cross area fertilization; 2) it is not 
being used heavily; and 3) it could impact revenue if usage 
increased. The day pass program numbers (location, usage, 
and fee) for the previous four IETF meetings are:
    Hiroshima, 124, $200
    Anaheim, 135, $200
    Maastricht, 71, $350 
    Beijing, 47, $350

Bob Hinden pointed out that the IAOC will not be making a 
decision today. There has not been a large response (less 
than a dozen) to the survey on Day Passes. There are some 
questions being asked that it is not possible to answer. 
The IAOC will wait to see the survey completed before making 
any decision. 

3. Participant Assistance Program
=================================

Ray Pelletier provided an overview of the current 
Participant Assistance and Comp Programs. The Participant 
Assistance Program (PAP) provides financial assistance in 
the form of travel, lodging, and reduced or waived 
registration fees to an individual who needs the financial 
assistance to attend an IETF meeting at which their 
presence is deemed important. These individuals may be: 1) 
a member of the IESG, IAB, IAOC, or NomCom; 2) A WG/BOF 
member or Author, or 3) a NOC Volunteer. Approval for the 
Participant Assistance program is by the Chair of the IETF 
for IESG members, WG/BOF members, or Authors; 2) Chair of 
the IAB for IAB members; 3) Chair of the IAOC for IAOC 
members and NOC Volunteers; and 4) the IAD (as ISOC) for 
NomCom members and any of the above outgoing Chairs. 
Funding is from the IETF, IAB and IAOC annual Budget. 

Ray also described the Comp Program. Comps are in the form 
of registration fee waivers. These are provided to: 1) 
Hosts and Sponsors in accordance with an MoU negotiated by 
the parties (Sponsor and IAD); 2) some of the NOC 
Volunteers; and 3) Tuesday Guest Passes to college 
students, professors, and ISOC Chapter members. 

Ray concluded by providing some recommendations on how to 
structure public disclosure of information about these 
programs. Both the Participant Assistance Program and the 
Comp Program should be made public for transparency. The 
names of recipients should not be disclosed to respect 
their privacy. The IAOC should report funds expended in 
support of the PAP in its minutes following each IETF 
meeting. The Meetings committee should review Comp Program 
annually for reasonableness and implementation. 

Ray provided some preliminary numbers for the PAP in 2010. 
In Anaheim, the IETF Chair covered one registration fee, 
and ISOC covered the hotel and registration fees for two 
members of the NomCom. In Maastricht, the IETF Chair 
covered two full registration fees and a single day pass 
registration fee, and the IAOC covered one registration 
fee. In Beijing, the IETF Chair covered one registration 
fee. 

Ray also provided preliminary numbers for the Comp Program. 
Anaheim included 1 host/sponsor, 1 Maastricht host, 4 NOC 
volunteers, 1 ISOC Chapter guest, and 4 others. Maastrich 
had 16 host/sponsors, 6 Beijing Hosts, 2 Staff, 16 NOC 
volunteers, and the transcriptionist. Beijing had 54 
Host/Sponsor, 11 NOC volunteers, and 2 Prague Host. The 
magnitude of the numbers depends on the size of the host 
team and the number of sponsors among other factors. 

Ray asked if there was a motion to endorse the 
recommendations. There was concern that flexibility and 
discretion is needed. It is important to avoid the 
appearance of an insider's club where you can get freebies 
if you know the right people. For transparency people need 
to understand that there is a program and what the 
magnitude of the program is. The community also needs to 
understand how the program is currently being used. Ray 
Pelletier agreed to take an action write up a more concrete 
recommendation for discussion at a later IAOC meeting. 

4. Meeting Companion Program 
============================

Ray Pelletier presented a proposed experiment for a Meeting 
Companion Program at the upcoming Prague IETF. Many IETF 
members are accompanied to IETF meetings. The lives of the 
IETF companions would be enhanced if they had a way to meet 
and communicate with each other. The lives of IETF members 
might also be enhanced. The Meetings committee is favorably 
inclined to support this experiment. 

The Meeting Companion Program would permit companions to: 
1) attend the Welcome Reception for a small fee (e.g., $15 
- $25); 2) be invited to a pre-reception meeting for 
themselves only to meet each other (say, 4:30 - 5:00); 3) 
be invited to add their name to a meeting list for 
themselves only (e.g., 80companions@ietf.org); and 4) 
receive a distinctive meeting badge to provide access to 
the venue, but not the sessions. 

There are several steps in the experiment including: 1) 
provide an online registration form to accept credit cards 
and indicate willingness to be on list (should registration 
form should include registration number of "sponsor"?); 2) 
prepare badge; 3) setup email list (include IAD and member 
of AMS staff); 4) setup pre-reception meeting (perhaps ask 
during registration whether attending that and the welcome 
reception); 5) possibly invite tourist bureau 
representative to their meeting; 6) invite feedback on 
experiment; and 7) get out of their way. 

Several IAOC members thought this was a great idea. Anybody 
over 18 years old qualifies as a meeting companion. Ray 
Pelletier will get with AMS to move the experiment along. 

5. Beijing Update
=================
 
Ray Pelletier provided an update of the Beijing financial 
and attendance numbers.  Both revenue and expenses were 
slightly lower than expected, but the meeting was within 
budget. The variances were all within normal expectations. 
Attendance was slighter higher than projected (1,097 versus 
1,075). Early bird and late registrations were down 
slightly, but these were offset by higher than budgeted 
student registrations. There were 309 first timers. The 
rise in student registrations is probably attributable to 
the number of academic institutions in the vicinity. 

7. Retreat - Dates & Location; Dec Call(s)
=========================================

There are currently two calls scheduled for December 2010, 
on 2 Dec and 16 Dec. Due to the compressed schedule and the 
holiday season, Ray Pelletier proposed that the IAOC cancel 
the 2 Dec call. There was unanimous support for this 
proposal. The next IAOC call will be 16 December. Bob 
Hinden requested that we try to approve some of the 
outstanding minutes prior to that via an e-vote. 

The current dates for the IAOC Retreat are 17-18 May 2011. 
There was some discussion on possible meeting locations. 
Marshall Eubanks proposed alternating between the ISOC 
facilities in Geneva and Reston with the next meeting being 
in Reston. There was general support for this approach. 

Bob Hinden adjourned the meeting at 10:59 am EST.