Re: httpbis vs yam meeting slots in Stockholm

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Fri, 10 July 2009 09:30 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 240AD3A6C44 for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 02:30:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.068
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.068 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.339, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_MLH_Stock1=0.87]
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 nq1iwHdV1nwW for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 02:30:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CBD428C0D8 for <discuss@apps.ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 02:30:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.2.145] (shiny.isode.com [62.3.217.250]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id <SlcKaABV9IE-@rufus.isode.com>; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:31:21 +0100
Message-ID: <4A570A3A.9090704@isode.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:30:34 +0100
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
To: Apps Discuss <discuss@apps.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: httpbis vs yam meeting slots in Stockholm
References: <4A52F11F.6000400@gmx.de> <59412B3595BB07DCFCFDC95E@caldav.corp.apple.com> <4A561F0A.1030100@isode.com> <A9E3809AE5D93F28D69827D6@PST.JCK.COM> <96684634-7032-4399-9721-75BA83893025@mnot.net> <4A570976.2090108@isode.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A570976.2090108@isode.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:30:56 -0000

Alexey Melnikov wrote:

> Mark Nottingham wrote:

 [...]

>> It'd be best if we could move HTTPbis to another slot on Thursday;  
>> e.g., morning I
>
> This wouldn't work, as there are no room available.
> And there are no Apps area slots, so we can't swap anything. We could 
> try to swap slots with WG in other areas, but this might create other 
> conflicts elsewhere.
> Also note that the morning I is 2.5 hours, not 2 hours allocated for 
> HTTPBIS.
>
>> and afternoon II don't have any obvious conflicts (at  least to me), 
>> and afternoon II looks to have available space (although  I suspect 
>> that's because congresshall A and B are being prepared for  the 
>> plenary, although I note congresshall C is in use).
>
> It is also only 1 hour long.

Considering that my original proposal is not working and I showed that 
Mark's alternatives wouldn't work either, I am suggesting we leave 
things as is.
Unless people have a third proposal that would work for the majority of 
interested participants.

We can try to coordinate agendas between the two meetings.