IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Mon, 01 August 2011 15:17 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
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 3207611E807C for <81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 08:17:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.296, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, PLING_QUERY=1.39, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 PGHoBJ64ponR for <81attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 08:17:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from darkstar.isi.edu (darkstar.isi.edu [128.9.128.127]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53EF321F8560 for <81attendees@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 08:17:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.89] (pool-71-105-81-169.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net [71.105.81.169]) (authenticated bits=0) by darkstar.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p71FHK4L018584 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 1 Aug 2011 08:17:24 -0700 (PDT)
References: <4E34C3A9.2020502@att.com> <A5B9F059BE69461F8008EBECD84A1E67@china.huawei.com> <80A0822C5E9A4440A5117C2F4CD36A6402713C27@DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net> <DB9C80EF-5231-40B9-B9A9-D0EFB3744DC7@isi.edu> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1108011106280.3518@joyce.lan>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1108011106280.3518@joyce.lan>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8J3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Message-Id: <67CD028F-3C38-4036-B130-EBD47B6F2AAE@isi.edu>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (8J3)
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:17:29 -0700
To: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: "<81attendees@ietf.org>" <81attendees@ietf.org>
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: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 15:17:55 -0000

On Aug 1, 2011, at 8:06 AM, "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

>> A city with a real set of international connections is better (eg Vancouver)
> 
> Quebec is within driving distance of about 1/4 of the population in North
> America.  Vancouver isn't.

So is Trenton NJ - is at next? Do we optimize for drivers at the expense of fliers?

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email