Re: feedback & blog entry
SM <sm@resistor.net> Sun, 22 September 2013 16:57 UTC
Return-Path: <sm@resistor.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8B9D21F9E00; Sun, 22 Sep 2013 09:57:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.766
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.766 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.167, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C+tVpAwZaeDu; Sun, 22 Sep 2013 09:57:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D556711E8101; Sun, 22 Sep 2013 09:57:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r8MGvSFa005025; Sun, 22 Sep 2013 09:57:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1379869053; bh=x+pM2zkD7TUykDpb/jQ9mogrdoy/sCLLC5zYlVPLqk0=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=Mznd8SUN0eNlfO5xcI2YNUKeqeASnRv91sb/q4Cg4a4CGoi+1Hybpo39K4dG2rKFN Y/OwByFzMh7JlW+6pYYmzth3KA3yMzVsIXnn32DLmdIVl8idOnWcNv2ryy1rHXicG3 vAdRRrDw3Ev8Vszy1rnBSdMjQ6LUoU2pUqkg+mdc=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1379869053; i=@resistor.net; bh=x+pM2zkD7TUykDpb/jQ9mogrdoy/sCLLC5zYlVPLqk0=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=YWIM8D0kN+m0m7mJf4eNxj+bN3fnd2L5lPfqlMAcTwCs8OyQDKUOjEIUivWnD4aqW P0vKiqLBjU2OHf9XIGe30bbzVSjXdXSx0lXXSTFKJDOovgprAHvFDdmHiZbh79vdQA goLS//KYUHr8T5lkCZZsredXttnFVXZdBKQHDoU0=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130922084046.0c652ec0@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2013 09:36:17 -0700
To: IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org>
From: SM <sm@resistor.net>
Subject: Re: feedback & blog entry
In-Reply-To: <2722B4FA-425D-45D7-B307-91D808C49FB3@ietf.org>
References: <2722B4FA-425D-45D7-B307-91D808C49FB3@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Sun, 22 Sep 2013 16:57:35 -0000
Hi Jari, At 03:10 20-09-2013, IETF Chair wrote: >One of things that I feel is important for the chair to do is to >talk to various IETF contributors - not just on this list! :-) - and >try to understand what issues they have, either technical or >otherwise. Here's a small overview report of my recent effort to talk I read the article. As a comment about the last paragraph, the metric being used is not the best in my humble opinion. Spencer Dawkins made an insightful comment which I would look into if I was looking for a better metric. Regards, -sm
- feedback & blog entry IETF Chair
- Re: feedback & blog entry todd
- Re: feedback & blog entry SM
- Re: feedback & blog entry IETF Chair
- Re: feedback & blog entry Spencer Dawkins
- Re: feedback & blog entry SM