Re: IAB volunteers

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Thu, 26 May 2016 16:21 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.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 37D7012D6E9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 May 2016 09:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.216
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.216 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=j/akXqKx; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com header.b=xftpWQyl
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 xkjF1DkEOumw for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 May 2016 09:21:44 -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 D0E5412D0DF for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 May 2016 09:21:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.227.83.46]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u4QGKvCD016761 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 26 May 2016 09:21:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1464279670; x=1464366070; bh=otWZn82jMbzm2ertqbVxuErevhzwl3jw/agf8jNBIWQ=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=j/akXqKxqN+Uf0ynJRQstfgdVxba71mfxfPxVfghG019rrsus0MCbGxTLJZJRm3jA SQOLjirWxQKkezNbBoKtQx06ZIte+WFs7UzvbDzEn3T/WkIjkbHN7OJcPvtnQGh+3x CiTe5MBzqg53+F8Ea1Ve+MFIEvHTTQJrfrfrDulE=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1464279670; x=1464366070; i=@elandsys.com; bh=otWZn82jMbzm2ertqbVxuErevhzwl3jw/agf8jNBIWQ=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=xftpWQyl6VpXguaNVPS/Soxc9Z1mb68RUgAwnWnLXPXi59khXgwMwa96bkK2orPl/ 7Qd6PDloIL1p+1MEbS2H81jMsoJI4sPoSFzo7dd3RHYFkaq/P+TvrXmG9I7rEPynoE BSpQn1iSntNCPkaNjbj1l9y3uHdIxETYk6+94GGo=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20160526091204.1171bab0@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 09:20:08 -0700
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Subject: Re: IAB volunteers
In-Reply-To: <CA+9kkMDAhUkA2m7-Np+7_HWxMNPZRqDVgRo5iV47pXph6hRHdA@mail.g mail.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160526015322.0f21cae0@elandnews.com> <CA+9kkMDAhUkA2m7-Np+7_HWxMNPZRqDVgRo5iV47pXph6hRHdA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/_pZVWai5KWObBpkXl4VXf2uSfL4>
Cc: 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, 26 May 2016 16:21:45 -0000

Hi Ted, John,
At 08:44 26-05-2016, Ted Hardie wrote:
>If a volunteer could not attend in person, I believe the IAB would 
>ask ICANN to provide facilities for remote participation.  I've put 
>this question on the IAB agenda for the June 1st meeting, so that we 
>can confirm that or provide a more complete answer.

Thanks.

At 09:05 26-05-2016, John C Klensin wrote:
>I think it is entirely reasonable for the IAB to inquire as Ted
>suggests, but I believe that a discussion of what ICANN (or any
>other internationally-oriented organization in the Internet
>space) would do is entirely irrelevant to the question of what
>we should do about the location IETF 100.

I am okay with the above.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy