IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [86attendees] Pie?

Robin Wilton <wilton@isoc.org> Thu, 14 March 2013 20:10 UTC

Return-Path: <wilton@isoc.org>
X-Original-To: 86attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 86attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA0B311E81E3 for <86attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:10:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.264
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.264 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F+Gw5rCWF8n2 for <86attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:10:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp171.dfw.emailsrvr.com (smtp171.dfw.emailsrvr.com [67.192.241.171]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D93811E81E1 for <86attendees@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:10:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp17.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id EECB2188423; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 16:10:25 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: OK
Received: by smtp17.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: wilton-AT-isoc.org) with ESMTPSA id 32D3018828B; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 16:10:25 -0400 (EDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A8E25BDA-F794-42FA-8245-3441565B8EC5"
From: Robin Wilton <wilton@isoc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130314200047.63176.qmail@joyce.lan>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 16:06:55 -0400
Message-Id: <5BE9DA1C-A988-44D0-8D40-E9C96EAD28DC@isoc.org>
References: <20130314200047.63176.qmail@joyce.lan>
To: John Levine <ietf@johnlevine.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
Cc: bortzmeyer+ietf@nic.fr, 86attendees@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [86attendees] Pie?
X-BeenThere: 86attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <86attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/86attendees>, <mailto:86attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/86attendees>
List-Post: <mailto:86attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:86attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/86attendees>, <mailto:86attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 20:10:27 -0000

I'm strangely disappointed that draft was published on 4/1…  ;^)

(Maybe it was a couple of weeks late passing WGLC)

R
 
Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
Internet Society

email: wilton@isoc.org
Phone: +44 705 005 2931
Twitter: @futureidentity




On 14 Mar 2013, at 16:00, John Levine wrote:

>> I'm not sure it has practical consequences for the IETF. Is there even
>> one RFC which uses the number Pi? ("pi" in RFC 2865 is a different
>> beast)
> 
> RFC 3091.  Sheesh.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 86attendees mailing list
> 86attendees@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/86attendees

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email