IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [93attendees] [IAOC] Meeting schedule

Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> Tue, 21 July 2015 14:09 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: 93attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 93attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E9D01B2E79; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 07:09:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t5Q35JCAKViJ; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 07:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com [64.89.234.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B70E51B2E03; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 07:09:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-03.win.nominum.com [64.89.235.66]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (verified OK)) by sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC6CEDA0089; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 14:09:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.0.20.218] (71.233.41.235) by CAS-03.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.224.2; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 07:09:09 -0700
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_2F1DC753-2FE9-49DF-A257-58AF465F06B5"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2102\))
From: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.01.1507210651360.62716@rabdullah.local>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 10:09:07 -0400
Message-ID: <D0ED2FDB-5F27-4F98-B50D-6800E7A90C0C@nominum.com>
References: <p06240602d1d3231e977e@130.129.14.251> <alpine.OSX.2.01.1507201630210.60032@rabdullah.local> <D2E48F4F-CE89-4C1F-ACB4-85F219651A8C@juniper.net> <CAJU8_nXo56kuodKCkWyWFW=sM95Hju216uPD_W3WyzSj3qiUrQ@mail.gmail.com> <p06240603d1d3c31599ff@[130.129.14.251]> <55AE1BF9.6060407@gmail.com> <55AE3545.4050403@dcrocker.net> <CY1PR09MB063444AFD8CFA87040CE4A79EA840@CY1PR09MB0634.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> <CY1PR09MB0634899D77D1B7C510AF92CCEA840@CY1PR09MB0634.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> <081364BF-3F03-4BFB-B5A6-FA2E7062041E@nominum.com> <alpine.OSX.2.01.1507210557550.62358@rabdullah.local> <B54303E8-2CAF-4762-9B75-E01DFDB67E72@nominum.com> <alpine.OSX.2.01.1507210651360.62716@rabdullah.local>
To: Ole Jacobsen <olejacobsen@me.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2102)
X-Originating-IP: [71.233.41.235]
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/93attendees/FagOqZ6VdT5tJ2oWhtWbJHREwnU>
Cc: "iaoc@ietf.org" <IAOC@ietf.org>, "93attendees@ietf.org" <93attendees@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Henning Schulzrinne <Henning.Schulzrinne@fcc.gov>
Subject: Re: [93attendees] [IAOC] Meeting schedule
X-BeenThere: 93attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list of IETF 93 attendees that have opted in on this list. " <93attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/93attendees>, <mailto:93attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/93attendees/>
List-Post: <mailto:93attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:93attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/93attendees>, <mailto:93attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 14:09:51 -0000

On Jul 21, 2015, at 9:58 AM, Ole Jacobsen <olejacobsen@me.com> wrote:
> Henning used the word "sandwiches" and you immediately jumped to the 
> conclusion that all hotel-made veggie ones are bad and for THAT reason 
> this would kill the idea for you. Can you just for one minute try to 
> think about some, any food option that you could combine with a 
> plenary, something that could be implemented in a grab-an-go fashion?

No, Ole, for two reasons.   First, I actually have _years_ of experience with hotel sandwiches, and so I have a concrete basis for knowing that your optimism is unfounded.   I know for a fact based on personal experience that grab-and-go lunches do not work.

Second, because what Henning proposed is exactly the wrong thing to do, irrespective of the quality of the sandwiches.   We can’t make the week bigger, and we need to stop trying.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email