IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Concerns about Singapore

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Thu, 07 April 2016 23:10 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
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 98C3812D556 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 16:10:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 W-E9Uwv5HqlS for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 16:10:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22f.google.com (mail-lf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22f]) (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 BEC0012D12E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 16:10:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id c126so67677618lfb.2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Apr 2016 16:10:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=G8PDqNLVZkJtCX/0FWzjHDt0MkGl2bjogb5V1W85MCw=; b=VdR1u8LlaiScJInaEdcTcImZFdrTmO63ZERrxm1ypXlHmcAteFWOgo+WrseMlzXORt HhZw5WnE+B3c9ugsIidcRlf3/90fOA7f5I9I7kD5w1HgpygPn8FHiMCVPwRNr1Ihc7C+ RRTU5bQVMg0gIy1EanVXsf7oPzGvaSrWZXhw80pNjoNFwv6HWD2QODu24u8Rza9toJOb CQyP8KeSKn2ZF+LmdXYn7Xri1ABVOowAom4HKYdhoufH00coKz1qW0SsK+OuhZdwZ8Si tW2G+eHmbWiLWe6H8E9uo5Pso+PHhwm6xYMswR7NA+5zuayHYMLW2eAjBvlPTgk+tIy2 1G5Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=G8PDqNLVZkJtCX/0FWzjHDt0MkGl2bjogb5V1W85MCw=; b=cXSShjg7uo9uENOo3xzY8zXnvQNcXoaM0rOQzzZSzj/sTitNyhHMW3ZyQXbUpJusuP c7q+Wdj67bCBqS76H4gHZO6YMndMoU6kZtq7Y3QeUSrGjZEO0w0CpyFAddRFYzkX927q +4vx+EwkvFaUw4IdhuUyZmJo5jQ+jq4C9FmX5/gfaru23jTYIeHHjd/U2fm2JvYsdqIz 0VKeCWLSVuP7/4FAYWKthuDSffo9yF+xNcj+o307YtJEB7d9k69aPwwJUvTaaLW1eNKN NVSC/uPkpUKcf/1h4fyOqo1eG21e8zKlpR1YOQRYMyND+STNwBlJQR89d+EkZS1YQp7I E80g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJpuPMfokAWv2RixXeN5y10TigZl0MjVha8MyDqYSg2vThAEe5sd41iJew2gPNoIKwbZLfGa0uhlnyjbQ==
X-Received: by 10.25.144.143 with SMTP id s137mr2359522lfd.53.1460070644881; Thu, 07 Apr 2016 16:10:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.40.136 with HTTP; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 16:10:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [2001:67c:370:176:ec62:80b3:91d7:df8a]
In-Reply-To: <A1D17F91B9C8D60D91222AAC@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
References: <0D914666-C3D4-4CCE-AD5E-4E5B34EA1A73@piuha.net> <20160407182936.GA21340@pfrc.org> <CAB75xn780nNDjGa_Cc222J20-+1CCHt09Xp8KHzaK=n0xx51pg@mail.gmail.com> <5706B100.9040509@mnt.se> <CAB75xn6fmj84ROUtG5eUB3GerHx83hrEr3w5vSADY_g=BRg5FA@mail.gmail.com> <5706BA40.3060005@mnt.se> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1604072157240.31096@uplift.swm.pp.se> <5706CEEA.70402@alcatel-lucent.com> <A1D17F91B9C8D60D91222AAC@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2016 20:10:05 -0300
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1m8ep-O__b--zFKUyNqXv+rntTj6Nc1LoAED6_WrqEMVg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Concerns about Singapore
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1140227422b032052fed30c8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Tm1c-GuU-iRUYAnv-mfTzGUiFGg>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org Discussion" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 07 Apr 2016 23:10:50 -0000

Supposedly we never have very good attendance in Minneapolis because it
doesn't pull in tourists. :)

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:33 PM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:

>
>
> --On Thursday, April 07, 2016 23:19 +0200 Laurent Ciavaglia
> <laurent.ciavaglia@nokia.com> wrote:
>
> > On 07/04/2016 22:00, EXT Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> >> There are no perfect places to go.
> > Except Minneapolis. ;)
>
> If it were, the frequency with which we have been back there in
> recent years might act as confirmation of the maxim that the
> perfect is the enemy of the good.   I assume there are other
> reasons, perhaps even better ones.
>
>    john
>
>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email