Re: [Cfrg] Requesting removal of CFRG co-chair

Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com> Wed, 25 December 2013 05:18 UTC

Return-Path: <contact@taoeffect.com>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B7EE1AE1FE for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:18:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.125
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.125 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no
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 jMn99TtEAe3b for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:18:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a4.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdccac.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.202]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 394771AE1F9 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:18:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a4.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a4.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12AC551C063; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:17:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=taoeffect.com; h=subject :mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id :references:to; s=taoeffect.com; bh=eI8k0PBsSWhMm+nCljcXicQGscQ= ; b=nqP+4qTt5toy5SLh/TkBJo5n1lt/4NHA7WeJA2R30iXzmOrlpQemwCtvTu9y vxp+KjwzdLQ6vTbwKIJjzrL2HPbTXgh+ZvFhYAI9Uh3MbEkVWVWoX5DCR5XNXuPO /y4KL7qMp+mXNA3WZOMdYxP0z+yffjSxmWKIU6SgNneqYlo=
Received: from [192.168.2.3] (ip98-180-48-204.ga.at.cox.net [98.180.48.204]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: contact@taoeffect.com) by homiemail-a4.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6A21051C062; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:17:55 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F8FDF94E-1758-4A57-87DF-B6A43E8A3812"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
From: Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
In-Reply-To: <545E0C9B-5C24-43EA-85BE-03A13D70C2E2@taoeffect.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2013 00:17:49 -0500
Message-Id: <52FA5F5A-2977-4836-A63C-53E59C5D3440@taoeffect.com>
References: <CAGZ8ZG2f9QHX40RcB8aajWvEfG0Gh_uewu2Rq7bQGHYNx6cOmw@mail.gmail.com> <52B91820.9090706@cisco.com> <CAGZ8ZG02+o=Qm0gUQiVF9H_=wfn+wQt8ahY1ntLHNsELXbvtVg@mail.gmail.com> <AA79A33E-D6B9-4693-A670-B4458011B394@cisco.com> <CA+cU71mTCVHAe2a46USJihr9ihPVw_vQTu0xk-mpRp41La88Xg@mail.gmail.com> <e4054b534e308e3c17c22ccf987d3edc.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <E7E97A5B-455F-4ABD-A182-DF6DC38F3429@taoeffect.com> <199f08bb0a197065184a07bed40e4e1a.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <545E0C9B-5C24-43EA-85BE-03A13D70C2E2@taoeffect.com>
To: Tao Effect Support <contact@taoeffect.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Cc: Trevor Perrin <trevp@trevp.net>, David McGrew <mcgrew@cisco.com>, Brian Weis <bew@cisco.com>, "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Requesting removal of CFRG co-chair
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2013 05:18:04 -0000

Correction, this comment of mine is incorrect:

On Dec 24, 2013, at 7:04 PM, Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com>; wrote:

> OK, then explain why no opportunity was given to raise objections (at that time).
> 
> Is that just how the CFRG operates? The chair (or co-chair) picks the person they want to co-chair and the rest of the community has no say in it?

It was pointed out to me off-list that David did in fact give the group an opportunity to voice their support or concerns for Kevin's nomination as co-chair:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/current/msg03031.html

Sincere apologies for my mistaken understanding about that.

I think I must have either misread or repeated a mistaken understanding from one of the emails I'd read in this thread.

Cheers,
Greg

--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA.