IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Dotzero <dotzero@gmail.com> Tue, 17 November 2020 20:10 UTC

Return-Path: <dotzero@gmail.com>
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 951B23A03F1; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:10:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 sfjDWA_sg3NT; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:10:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x82f.google.com (mail-qt1-x82f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F004C3A03EE; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:10:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x82f.google.com with SMTP id 7so16832379qtp.1; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:10:03 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=oUsRDPxhRbJ8GRxTMCStQXAwinsgtVER0rcj7JZdyAw=; b=gS9Ppu9sZaAfCEMJe5M5beJcjaLlmEiQ06qUzqmWV2MmjLe2QUj1VrOvP72txwbu0G r3CotxafaxIhaeZj76WufqF5wfY0wTroXmWLyaFjAA9Fz4pyY4XqScQCcQeq7wEpCaYp Gw9YK4BJl400x2gbzAF7v2jI7K8kMzEx0Q8ruiWLzpwsB+6n+UE2VWIvxVFoi8yYyP1m j4jgfDfGitj9wJecKyomzb2FpAL8IrgWvLvZV/L4kciTqtODEVbQcr3/OCB+77jq1y0+ pz5LGY/WeX7VygCqj+NRXUGxcDFj/gbLH+G3BmrYRTWcIXrxOVB+oHjATVjLG4sS+/Qh 1bEw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=oUsRDPxhRbJ8GRxTMCStQXAwinsgtVER0rcj7JZdyAw=; b=DZfg0CEga1KK2pfq12xGPyTrLtLK23arDuDqrilUybObx7HCQMNLLc8mroeiOpMOQl BV2VqFhUhCqBEyzMkbpN9nJIWat1N/sCbzZw26RgHYK7zThkIJXt5H7R6t9V4FtZXJSD rfyvIG7uFn+iK9EogvKor07zvbaCDeQbAzwPVSgS2jAKiVx6q1t3ZJPAolugsJpB46KA m5lgYid2+SW9fYjWJz0xsOlsV/6sFF09KfiYwahpWJRjnflD9NjzbwLojQjeml/7Gcbt R2vjclitmX2+d/a545sPKXW0aDgNyifbvLO9F7FXQUySYSMZH+v85tMLQIGtaGsmoCjX telw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5324FaZjl1aZVhfNGx7fWfhwXNlLAVtEnxEYqFSIwq1j+pDeXskE L0TwfaRYx9sliOf2QZjK/byNRmJ8h2Ughpag3iLF1DIp
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxEjZi4OlspXxkKkMcRgMsnB/Gp3lRa37Xr8H2CbcYO92L0lUsnN0f7VCFbPZPeFmV4WeX96VdC6NZUjjyumPg=
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5c05:: with SMTP id i5mr945365qti.34.1605643803025; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:10:03 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CADyWQ+F9zJuMoWJV7Rp3fVjESdB4N4dE-AjJjh82Satd6br-tQ@mail.gmail.com> <801158ba-fcef-1bf3-497a-89e08c0005ec@dcrocker.net> <CADyWQ+FMfFeaOR8nBzSSZagp_msoDz9LfWfz-iZ+hKGgycWAOw@mail.gmail.com> <9BAE8F43-9B78-4352-A111-9549B7C46EDB@bluepopcorn.net> <CAL0qLwagPQrfBZS+YgJJaPWr161vPz3cLHQ8Ltqa=dutMB6mtA@mail.gmail.com> <d862f3f5-d127-f10f-8860-8875d8b3b9e5@dcrocker.net>
In-Reply-To: <d862f3f5-d127-f10f-8860-8875d8b3b9e5@dcrocker.net>
From: Dotzero <dotzero@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:09:51 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJ4XoYdjKDpSz-__q8sZJsP9T7HR9y5TeMNBhMT5Ya6wq6NEyA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dave CROCKER <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Cc: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>, dmarc-chairs@ietf.org, IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000083e40705b4531488"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/td2rxiVmhIEq2P0VSW0KfqkaEmE>
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: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 20:10:06 -0000

Considering that some of us have to be up in the wee hours to participate,
it would be nice to know whether it is happening or cancelled. Just saying.
If the agenda is that light weight I may skip it even if held.

Michael Hammer.

On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 2:35 PM Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote:

> On 11/16/2020 10:46 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> > I'm discussing this with the chairs and they or I will get back to you
> > shortly.
>
>
> Forgive me, but this is all a bit nuts.
>
> Very few days before the scheduled session, we get a query about
> canceling it, though the query also included a fresh, 'lightweight'
> agenda.
>
> A couple of responses are posted, stating a preference for cancellation,
> with no immediate responses choosing having the meeting (though today,
> some have).
>
> We are now less than 12 hours from the scheduled time and still have not
> received a definitive decision by the chairs.
>
> d/
>
> --
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> dmarc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email