IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [77attendees] Ad hoc meetings (Was: Re: Bar BoF: ip traceback)

Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org> Tue, 30 March 2010 23:31 UTC

Return-Path: <stewe@stewe.org>
X-Original-To: 77attendees@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 77attendees@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE34B3A6C21 for <77attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.037
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.037 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.432, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, GB_I_INVITATION=-2]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZFmDlFcpxBxx for <77attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stewe.org (stewe.org [85.214.122.234]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 267633A6B47 for <77attendees@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.104] (unverified [24.5.132.232]) by stewe.org (SurgeMail 3.9e) with ESMTP id 629529-1743317 for multiple; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 01:31:41 +0200
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.24.0.100205
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:31:27 -0700
From: Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org>
To: Marshall Eubanks <tme@americafree.tv>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C7D7D7DF.20996%stewe@stewe.org>
Thread-Topic: [77attendees] Ad hoc meetings (Was: Re: Bar BoF: ip traceback)
Thread-Index: AcrQYR4q1fJtlZAV0EWCzlomLRGkRg==
In-Reply-To: <CDF5BB9C-F2D1-4146-B2E1-F7FD5CC39829@americafree.tv>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: 24.5.132.232
X-Authenticated-User: stewe@stewe.org
X-ORBS-Stamp: Your IP (24.5.132.232) was found in the spamhaus database. http://www.spamhaus.net
Cc: Thomas Hardjono <hardjono@MIT.EDU>, Scott Brim <scott.brim@gmail.com>, "77attendees@ietf.org" <77attendees@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [77attendees] Ad hoc meetings (Was: Re: Bar BoF: ip traceback)
X-BeenThere: 77attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <77attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/77attendees>, <mailto:77attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/77attendees>
List-Post: <mailto:77attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:77attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/77attendees>, <mailto:77attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 23:31:15 -0000

Hi Marshall,

On 3.30.2010 16:16 , "Marshall Eubanks" <tme@americafree.tv> wrote:

> 
> On Mar 30, 2010, at 4:33 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> [...]
> 
> They are subject to the Note Well. That is certainly a rule.
> 

Are they?  Should they?  I'm not sure.

I think that there is a value in unofficial meetings that are not under Note
Well, along the IETF.  I think that this was the bar BOF's original mission.

Arguably, I have been attending one "bar BOF" during IETF77.  It was
fulfilling most of Lars' criteria for a bar BOF: invitation only, not openly
announced, in a restaurant/bar, freely discussing stuff (including the
appropriateness of the IETF as a venue for studying that stuff), high
density of discussions, no ADs invited and none present.  However, it was
something different than a dinner between companies in the same technology
field.  It certainly was not under Note Well.

I would not even know how to desribe my contributions to this meeting, if it
were under Note Well and assuming I were forced to make an IPR disclosure
under BCP 79.

Stephan
    

> [...]

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email