Re: [109all] NOC update #2

ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com Thu, 19 November 2020 13:05 UTC

MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET="US-ASCII"
From: ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com
Cc: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, ietf@ietf.org
Message-id: <01RS6MBSN3F6005PTU@mauve.mrochek.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 04:52:06 -0800
Subject: Re: [109all] NOC update #2
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Thu, 19 Nov 2020 22:57:20 +1300" <0C5C0CD2-BA44-412A-B2E7-85B8A3A90D57@ietf.org>
References: <1A8D2B8D-CC33-4430-B4FB-61995B3CF5EF@xagsolutions.com> <F2645AEB-4CFD-4629-9463-AF6DA019DFB7@xagsolutions.com> <CAB02C894930B157A8339707@PSB> <0C5C0CD2-BA44-412A-B2E7-85B8A3A90D57@ietf.org>
To: Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/BQcT2kvPevhBvmoo7ryS--6L7vU>
Precedence: list

> Hi John

> As this is quite a political question I will answer it for you.

> If the criticisms are narrowly interpreted as being about the front end we
> are running then this information implies that they were likely based on an
> incorrect interpretation of the issues.

I see. So when I attempted to switch browsers in order to work around an audio
problem and was informed that I could not rejoin the meeting because emailcore
had run over its time slot, even though the meeting was still going on, this
was simply a "misinterpretation of the issues" on my part?

And no doubt the problem with the calext meeting this morning was also purely
PIBKEC.

				Ned

Re: [109all] NOC update #2 John C Klensin
Re: [109all] NOC update #2 Jay Daley
Re: [109all] NOC update #2 John C Klensin
Re: [109all] NOC update #2 ned+ietf
Re: [109all] NOC update #2 Meetecho IETF support
Re: [109all] NOC update #2 Nick Hilliard
Re: [109all] NOC update #2 Stewart Bryant
Re: [109all] NOC update #2 ned+ietf