IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Mon, 23 May 2016 17:16 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.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 CC4EE12B069; Mon, 23 May 2016 10:16:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.326
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.326 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 eNfClUynq5dd; Mon, 23 May 2016 10:16:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C57C912B059; Mon, 23 May 2016 10:16:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1b4tSp-0006Z5-8t; Mon, 23 May 2016 17:16:23 +0000
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 19:16:22 +0200
Message-ID: <m2lh30vgnt.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
In-Reply-To: <5C31B46E-1528-44DE-AF3E-7E5CDC32636F@iii.ca>
References: <D3662363.190A96%jon.peterson@neustar.biz> <CAP8yD=spam0tQdfD-ssA6y_n-cuugHtrHKwTYieSruo8SMg_VQ@mail.gmail.com> <5C31B46E-1528-44DE-AF3E-7E5CDC32636F@iii.ca>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/hfmCKzgCrzIg5UTWG-BDht8Isb8>
Cc: iaoc@ietf.org, "ietf@ietf.org" <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: Mon, 23 May 2016 17:16:26 -0000

> I’m not a fan of the current choice for IETF 100.

nor am i.  it is true that there is no perfect venue.  but there are
less imperfect venues, and this ain't one.

randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email