I don't think that cancellation is a good idea due to the costs involved. This was already explained by the LLC. I'm pretty sure that the LLC is taking input from onsite participants regarding future IETF venues. I do hope that remote support infrastructure will be excellent (as it currently is) during IETF 127. Irrespective of border issues, work on IETF protocols must continue. On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 at 22:26, Tobias Fiebig <tobias=40fiebig.nl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Moin, > > The LLC however, will benefit from information as to how many people > > know their likely plans and how those might affect meeting revenue. > > Similarly the IESG will benefit from knowing whether such plans might > > affect the utility of a meeting. That'd be best done in a survey, > > e.g. to avoid the kind of you're-wrong/I'm-right messages we've just > > seen,so I hope someone will announce that such surveying will happen. > > (And there's no reason such a survey needs to be limited to one > > meeting, it might be generally useful to know people's future travel > > plans on an ongoing basis.) > > That is an excellent point. It seems like that, in the absence of such > a survey, an alternate implementation of a survey was created in the > mean time: > > https://boycott-ietf127.org/ > > With best regards, > Tobias >
