This was sent to ietf-announce, rather than IETF, but it should have been a public message.
Ted
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, May 23, 2025 at 9:12 AM
Subject: Re: IETF 127 San Francisco reassessment
To: IETF Executive Director <exec-director@xxxxxxxx>, Roman Danyliw <rdd@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: <ietf-announce@xxxxxxxx>
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, May 23, 2025 at 9:12 AM
Subject: Re: IETF 127 San Francisco reassessment
To: IETF Executive Director <exec-director@xxxxxxxx>, Roman Danyliw <rdd@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: <ietf-announce@xxxxxxxx>
Dear Jay, Roman, and members of the IETF LLC board,
In the statement below, you say:
It also considered the viability of the meeting and concluded that there
will be sufficient participation for the meeting to be financially
viable and to meet the threshold set by the IESG for a technically
viable meeting [3].
The citation is to the IESG response for the community discussion for Shenzhen, not for a decision by the IESG about San Francisco. In that process the LLC was asked to “explicitly confirm with the IESG that the core objective from RFC8718 of ‘Why we meet’ will be met”.
Is this reference meant to indicate that the IETF LLC used the data from the previous consultation to make this decision? Or did the IETF LLC explicitly confirm with the IESG that the core objective from RFC8718 will be met?
Roman, if the latter, I would appreciate a citation from the IESG and a summary similar to that in section E of https://www.ietf.org/media/documents/IETF_125_Decision_and_Survey_Summary_version_2024-10-08.pdf . I believe it is very important that the community understand the IESG's conclusion here, in addition to the IETF LLC's, as the IESG is charged with the standards process and part of the risk here is to the standards process.
Jay, if the former, I would like to understand why the IESG was not asked a similar question, given the community objections raised.
My thanks for your attention, and I look forward to your responses,
regards,
Ted Hardie
On Thu, May 22, 2025 at 8:39 PM IETF Executive Director <exec-director@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
At its annual onsite retreat held in Amsterdam 6-7 May 2025, the IETF Administration LLC Board reviewed its decision to hold IETF 127, 14-20 November 2026, in San Francisco, USA. This follows on from a series of events with the most recent being the board meeting on 16 April 2025 where the board considered the responses to its call for feedback [1] and received direct feedback from a number of IETF participants. We received a lot of constructive and diverse responses and we understand the various concerns raised.
The board has reached a final decision that IETF 127 will go ahead in San Francisco as planned.
In reaching this decision, the board reassessed this meeting with regards to the requirements of BCP 226 [2] and concluded that it remains consistent with the criteria in the BCP. It also considered the viability of the meeting and concluded that there will be sufficient participation for the meeting to be financially viable and to meet the threshold set by the IESG for a technically viable meeting [3].
The board sincerely thanks all of those that have provided feedback on this complex issue.
[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/STQXuEgpsJp8JJ0SRh1OghDb2XY/
[2] https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp226
[3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/Vmsojml9ghvSFbxNrDB9EU5KwNg/
--
Jay Daley
IETF Executive Director
exec-director@xxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list -- ietf-announce@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-announce-leave@xxxxxxxx
