IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Remote participation fees

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Sun, 15 February 2015 13:52 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE3101A1BA4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 05:52:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 uNAEokOGn4Zg for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 05:52:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com [64.89.234.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0E7B1A1BA2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 05:52:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (verified OK)) by sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7602DA01D5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 13:52:52 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-03.win.nominum.com [64.89.235.66]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7A8253E07A; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 05:52:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.20.107] (71.233.43.215) by CAS-03.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (64.89.235.66) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.224.2; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 05:52:53 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: Remote participation fees
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <0724649757D3500A9E6C7FAE@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 08:52:40 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <54F77B8C-0EDB-461D-A24B-6C56509142BE@nominum.com>
References: <54DE7F09.8030500@gmail.com> <C5FC0DB6-82F8-4C38-ABFD-D5D9A6E65933@isoc.org.ec> <54DE90C6.6030609@gmail.com> <E39AF4E0-58AB-4249-8A37-3D1CD2D5A691@gmail.com> <54DE9844.1010807@gmail.com> <61FBB27B-4EF3-40A0-8981-00EB89698295@isoc.org.ec> <B90F5E29-06C5-41D1-9F31-1BE42382995F@gmail.com> <CABmDk8=YPZ1W2tTOqP23U2PFVLoDh-3+wwmcA8mpta-Y05op2A@mail.gmail.com> <54DFBAF6.30409@cs.tcd.ie> <71F05D3C-95F1-4424-B6AA-49EBCCB7065A@isoc.org> <20150214225128.GS14296@verdi> <B754B188-1FC2-4E6B-B374-F3B882D99742@nominum.com> <0724649757D3500A9E6C7FAE@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-Originating-IP: [71.233.43.215]
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/fRm9VZ-bhINKKwsul7BNDC2wVL0>
Cc: John Leslie <john@jlc.net>, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 15 Feb 2015 13:52:55 -0000

On Feb 15, 2015, at 8:31 AM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:
> However, the example you note is part of my concern about
> whether the IETF is serious about remote participation.
> [...]

In the interests of brevity I won't include the entire essay you wrote here, but I agree with everything you said in it.   My reason for pointing out the hard work of the people who make the meetecho go is to emphasize their hard work and that fact that that even more such hard work would be required to increase the level of service.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email