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

"Charles E. Perkins" <charliep@computer.org> Tue, 16 November 2010 14:42 UTC

Return-Path: <charliep@computer.org>
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 86CA33A6C6E for <79attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 06:42:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 8Dvs7KYhgqXB for <79attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 06:41:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.65]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 919BA3A6C96 for <79attendees@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 06:41:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [99.51.74.16] (helo=[192.168.1.170]) by elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <charliep@computer.org>) id 1PIMk6-0007ai-Kc; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 09:42:42 -0500
Message-ID: <4CE29867.3020107@computer.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 06:42:47 -0800
From: "Charles E. Perkins" <charliep@computer.org>
Organization: Wichorus Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Adrian.Farrel@huawei.com
References: <399924.41458.qm@web27903.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4CE174EF.3050207@computer.org> <01c601cb857e$7b8d6a70$72a83f50$@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <01c601cb857e$7b8d6a70$72a83f50$@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ELNK-Trace: 137d7d78656ed6919973fd6a8f21c4f2d780f4a490ca6956abb457f1b4332f52706b78b360e4c951cb0e8d1afdaa3650350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 99.51.74.16
Cc: 'attendees' <79attendees@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [79attendees] Oops -- what were they _thinking_?
X-BeenThere: 79attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: charliep@computer.org
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 14:42:00 -0000

Hello Adrian,

I don't have any more information; and, as I said,
I was surprised to find that this might have
happened because it is very "un-IETF-like".
Maybe it was a misinterpretation of some event
that was not related to "politics" -- a likely
possibility.  But anyway I hope it was O.K. for
me to ask...

Regards,
Charlie P.


On 11/16/2010 3:07 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> Hi Charlie,
>
>> According to my seatmate on my flight home, there
>> were times when IESG or IAOC members would request
>> that certain hallway discussions be terminated.
>
> Could you be any more vague?
>
> Thanks,
> Adrian
>
>> 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?
>
>