Subject: [Mtgvenue] Issue #24: More than 1 hq hotel?

From: Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 14:11:01 +0200

Returning to this issue, I noted that there really was only one
significant reference to the headquarters hotel.  As such, what I
propose to do is remove the definition and state the following:

OLD:
>             The Headquarters Hotel has a space for use as a lounge, [...]
NEW:
>             At least one IETF Hotel has a space for use as a lounge, [...]

Eliot

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 16:55:24 -0400

>> At least one IETF Hotel has a space for use as a lounge, [...]

So, you cut some context:
      These can be at an open bar or casual
      restaurant.  Preferably the lounge area is on the path between the
      meeting rooms and the hotel entrance, and is available all day
      and night.

(I think "lounge" is confusing as a term, because we now have an IETF Lounge.
I suggest "Canonical Bar", but maybe another term would be better)

The fact that the lounge is on the path between rooms and entrance is
very very relevant. If it's not in the hotel with the meeting rooms, then it
serves no utility.

Chicago's hotel bar, while small, was very ideally placed, particularly for
people who were not staying at the hotel to "run into" people on their way
to the street.

I guess that I can live with the new text, given the "preferably" part.
I *DO* think that the lack of a canonical bar has hurt many a meeting venue,
the worst I experienced was Vienna, but I think Maastrick and Dublin (neither
of which I was at), was equally a problem.  Montreal, when we were at the
Congress Center while having the QE hotel as the "HQ", was another example.

--
Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

---

From: Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 08:06:11 +0200

Hi Michael,

>       meeting rooms and the hotel entrance, and is available all day

No that text still appears in the document.

Eliot

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 10:08:01 -0400

> No that text still appears in the document.

Yes, I know it's still in the document, but you cut it from the message.

That matters wrt how the old and new text considers.  How can a lounge
in a non-HQ Hotel be between the meeting room and hotel entrance if
there are no meeting rooms in the overflow hotel?

---

From: Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 16:41:39 +0200

Michael,

> there are no meeting rooms in the overflow hotel?

Good point.  I now understand.  How about this:

OLD:

            At least one IETF Hotel 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 on the path
between the
            meeting rooms and the hotel entrance, and is available all
day and
            night.

NEW:

            At least one IETF Hotel 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. When a hotel is collocated with the Facility,
preferably the
            lounge area is on the path between the meeting rooms and the
hotel
            entrance, and is available all day and night.

Eliot

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 09:14:42 -0700

Eliot,

> On May 15, 2017, at 7:41 AM, Eliot Lear <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Michael,
> 
> 

To me this thread has moved from a requirement to how it should be implemented.  Isn’t the requirement that we want a lounge?  I don’t think we need to specify where it is in all circumstances.

Bob

---

From: "Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 16:33:36 +0000

>            entrance, and is available all day and night.

I do think the term lounge is being over loaded with it meaning both the
³IETF lounge typically located in allocated meeting space/rooms² and the
lobby bar/lounge.   As I recall the original comment to the list was
specifically to have a bar area that was located centrally to where
attendees would be passing through and which permitted easy drop in access
during the day and into the evening where adhoc meetings could happen, and
due to the virtue that people would be frequently gathered in this bar
enabled unplanned meet ups that could lead to the adhoc discussions.

Examples of where this was present in the past are:   London (Metropole),
Buenos Aires Hilton, Chicago Sofitel, Berlin Intercontinental.

-glenn

---

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 10:57:54 -0700

On May 15, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Michael Richardson <[email-masked]> wrote:
> How can a lounge

I think you're missing something there. The document right now says

   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').

and with respect to the lounge:

   o  At least one IETF Hotel 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 on the path between the
      meeting rooms and the hotel entrance, and is available all day and
      night.

At any IETF I have been to, there has been at most one designated lounge, and there has been no attempt to provide one in a secondary hotel. If one is staying in a secondary hotel, the first consideration applies: "please feel free to use facilities a short walk from the hotel."  The designated central hotel, if there is one, would likely be the place you would find the lounge.

---

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 10:59:32 -0700

> On May 15, 2017, at 9:14 AM, Bob Hinden <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> To me this thread has moved from a requirement to how it should be implemented.  Isn’t the requirement that we want a lounge? 

Even that sounds like implementation. From an "it's four years in advance and we want to know whether this is a reasonable city to visit and hotel to maybe contract with" perspective, the requirement is that there is a room we could use as a lounge if we choose to.

---

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 20:37:54 +0200

I don’t think we want to “fix” the place of the lounge at the hotel.

We may have a conference center, with several hotels at 2 walking minutes. It may be more interesting to have the lounge in the conference center.

So, I will say:

At least one of the IETF meeting facilities has a space for use as a lounge …

Regards,
Jordi

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Mtgvenue <[email-masked]> en nombre de Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Responder a: <[email-masked]>
Fecha: domingo, 14 de mayo de 2017, 14:11
Para: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Asunto: [Mtgvenue] Issue #24: More than 1 hq hotel?

    
    Eliot

    _______________________________________________
    Mtgvenue mailing list
    [email-masked]
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue

**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.

---

From: Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 13:29:40 +0200

Hi Jordi,

> At least one of the IETF meeting facilities has a space for use as a lounge …

I think this is the wisest approach.

Eliot

---

From: Yoav Nir <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 08:52:57 +0300

> On 16 May 2017, at 14:29, Eliot Lear <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jordi,
> 
> 

+1.  This seems to have the least chance of causing the nightmare scenario where every hotel visited triggers a response that “Does this count? Maybe we should send a floorplan to the IETF list and ask everyone.”

The point is to empower the people making the selections, not to make every hotel an exception that has to be run by the whole IETF.

Yoav