IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: how to contact the IETF

Melinda Shore <mshore@cisco.com> Tue, 10 February 2009 16:36 UTC

Return-Path: <mshore@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 969CA3A694C for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 08:36:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 7UwEHmEjvGSc for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 08:36:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4AF53A6881 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 08:36:19 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,187,1233532800"; d="scan'208";a="36595622"
Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Feb 2009 16:36:07 +0000
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n1AGa7Yn018327; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 11:36:07 -0500
Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1AGa7Ka029460; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:36:07 GMT
Received: from xmb-rtp-205.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.59]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 10 Feb 2009 11:36:07 -0500
Received: from 10.98.54.215 ([10.98.54.215]) by xmb-rtp-205.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.59]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:36:06 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.0.0.071130
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 11:36:05 -0500
Subject: Re: how to contact the IETF
From: Melinda Shore <mshore@cisco.com>
To: Ed Juskevicius <edj.etc@gmail.com>, 'Noel Chiappa' <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <C5B71725.2FB9%mshore@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: how to contact the IETF
Thread-Index: AcmLm71dwBDfAk50Tn2W5ipiqAc5AAAAOHNgAABC7tY=
In-Reply-To: <A3D33643F23646759210D66B2DAA4567@noisy>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Feb 2009 16:36:07.0280 (UTC) FILETIME=[AC406F00:01C98B9D]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=346; t=1234283767; x=1235147767; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=mshore@cisco.com; z=From:=20Melinda=20Shore=20<mshore@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20how=20to=20contact=20the=20IETF |Sender:=20 |To:=20Ed=20Juskevicius=20<edj.etc@gmail.com>,=0A=20=20=20= 20=20=20=20=20=22'Noel=20Chiappa'=22=20<jnc@mercury.lcs.mit. edu>; bh=dHWn9QFKaELD0LG4uMYlAeuBaYlvT0msneDb8zZteuQ=; b=wrQ8lMT0LCBIhuIgQm9yL2RIKVPOxdbtYoubmW1BNSVZK6dSdRCdB2S2E4 O5kMBzXsguctvk8+G4JTux+wEWTfpaBkalZQSxV62yTOBA9Jsg2DhuF59JGx gdNqkrWsGB;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=mshore@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; );
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:36:21 -0000

On 2/10/09 11:34 AM, "Ed Juskevicius" <edj.etc@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am not trying to pour cold water on your idea here, but rather I am
> wondering how something like this could be formalized, versus handled as an
> exceptional case when and if it occurs.

I don't really how understand "count against" would
work in practice.

Melinda

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status