IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [81attendees] are we getting complacent? Good job!

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Thu, 04 August 2011 18:59 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
X-Original-To: 81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8606121F8B5A for <81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 11:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.886
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.886 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.677, BAYES_00=-2.599, PLING_QUERY=1.39]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wfPiQBAFXM4u for <81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 11:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2848421F8AD8 for <81attendees@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 11:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shinkuro.com (69-196-144-227.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.144.227]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4A0C81ECB41C for <81attendees@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 18:59:43 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 14:59:40 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: 81attendees@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20110804185940.GI38760@shinkuro.com>
References: <4E34C3A9.2020502@att.com> <A5B9F059BE69461F8008EBECD84A1E67@china.huawei.com> <80A0822C5E9A4440A5117C2F4CD36A6402713C27@DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net> <3DA9637F-1C72-43CB-B040-49F2A6FF26D9@softarmor.com> <alpine.OSX.2.01.1108011727420.20499@173-11-110-132-sfba.hfc.comcastbusiness.net> <4E398F03.1000806@dcrocker.net> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F13512DF56E@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <4E3AB6CC.2030606@dcrocker.net> <CAHBDyN5nvd-Z4AiTHxhMc3VuGkQA+oQ23XVYTM_aXKDLJ=bZmw@mail.gmail.com> <DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C2E114B95D@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C2E114B95D@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: Re: [81attendees] are we getting complacent? Good job!
X-BeenThere: 81attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF 81 Attendee List <81attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/81attendees>, <mailto:81attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/81attendees>
List-Post: <mailto:81attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:81attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/81attendees>, <mailto:81attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 18:59:28 -0000

On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 12:21:15PM -0400, Ross Callon wrote:

> think that Vancouver has worked out well more than once and I
> suspect that we might want one or two east coast North America
> locations (perhaps one in Canada and one in the US).

I think this is an excellent idea.  Both Halifax, NS and St John's, NL
would be interesting places to go, are large enough to have the
facilities, and would ensure that we had a lot of discussion about how
hard it is to get to places in Canada.  In St John's case, however,
we'd have the advantage that it would be equally difficult for almost
everyone.

(ObSmiley redacted)

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email