IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [79attendees] Oops -- what were they _thinking_?

Ole Jacobsen <ole@cisco.com> Tue, 16 November 2010 10:20 UTC

Return-Path: <ole@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: 79attendees@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 79attendees@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12A8A3A6DBD for <79attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 02:20:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.546
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.546 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.053, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 fPE-uTzMIos5 for <79attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 02:20:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E2E3A6BDE for <79attendees@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 02:20:11 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEANrp4UyrRN+K/2dsb2JhbACiW3GjNII/DQGYS4MMgj8EhFqBKoQJS4UQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,205,1288569600"; d="scan'208";a="620837550"
Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.223.138]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 Nov 2010 10:20:54 +0000
Received: from pita.cisco.com (pita.cisco.com [171.71.177.199]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oAGAKsIV002575; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 10:20:54 GMT
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 02:20:20 -0800
From: Ole Jacobsen <ole@cisco.com>
To: "Charles E. Perkins" <charliep@computer.org>
In-Reply-To: <4CE174EF.3050207@computer.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.63.1011160218570.27242@pita.cisco.com>
References: <399924.41458.qm@web27903.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4CE174EF.3050207@computer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Cc: attendees <79attendees@ietf.org>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@nokia.com>
Subject: Re: [79attendees] Oops -- what were they _thinking_?
X-BeenThere: 79attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Ole Jacobsen <ole@cisco.com>
List-Id: IETF 79 attendees list <79attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/79attendees>, <mailto:79attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/79attendees>
List-Post: <mailto:79attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:79attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/79attendees>, <mailto:79attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 10:20:12 -0000

I never heard of any such request either. You could ask the IESG, but 
I would be very surprised that they issued some kind "do not talk 
about x here" directive.

Ole


Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: ole@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj



On Mon, 15 Nov 2010, Charles E. Perkins wrote:

> 
> Hello folks,
> 
> According to my seatmate on my flight home, there
> were times when IESG or IAOC members would request
> that certain hallway discussions be terminated.
> I knew that it was considered impolite to comment
> in public on the lack of Internet access for the
> un-privileged "other" members of the local population,
> but I was surprised that our IETF "officials" would
> also act as thought police.  Is it true?  Does anyone
> on this list have any more direct information?
> 
> Regards,
> Charlie P.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 79attendees mailing list
> 79attendees@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/79attendees
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email