IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] IETF 109 possible agenda/session discussion

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Fri, 13 November 2020 20:23 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95C693A0937 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 12:23:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 5-O5CvZJu_d9 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 12:23:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (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 A87BE3A0929 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 12:23:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.109] (c-24-130-62-181.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.130.62.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id 0ADKRBhq003048 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 12:27:12 -0800
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
To: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>, IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
References: <CADyWQ+F9zJuMoWJV7Rp3fVjESdB4N4dE-AjJjh82Satd6br-tQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <801158ba-fcef-1bf3-497a-89e08c0005ec@dcrocker.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 12:23:34 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADyWQ+F9zJuMoWJV7Rp3fVjESdB4N4dE-AjJjh82Satd6br-tQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/G7pUsp3al3INgjGowVn7w1IPskA>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] IETF 109 possible agenda/session discussion
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc/>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 20:23:46 -0000

On 11/13/2020 10:40 AM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> During the chairs call this morning we were discussing the upcoming 
> meeting.  Now Seth has a conflict with the meeting time that can't be 
> altered.   Since work items have been progressing rather well recently, 
> and the editors are in positing, we discussed canceling the meeting.  We 
> wanted to get some feedback from the working group.
> 
> Here is a lightweight agenda Seth put together.  Should we 1) have a 
> meeting around these topics;  2) discuss other topics or 3) cancel the 
> meeting and keep moving along.


Four days before a scheduled, rare meeting, it's being canceled because 
one of its 3 chairs can't attend?

Or because it has suddenly been realized that the meeting won't be useful?

Really?

d/
-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email