Re: IETF areas re-organisation steps

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Fri, 26 December 2014 16:42 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 D6AF61A8AD9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 08:42:27 -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 uXWj1gqTNvAo for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 08:42:27 -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 022971A8ACE for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 08:42:26 -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 9FD77DA031B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 16:41:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (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 3EECC53E086; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 08:41:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.5.19] (107.19.188.132) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 08:41:54 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: IETF areas re-organisation steps
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <549D8C57.8090402@nostrum.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:41:25 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <3971A4A6-F4A6-4BAA-9DAF-974EE674DD89@nominum.com>
References: <ED473823-2B1E-4431-8B42-393D20BA72DF@piuha.net> <549D8C57.8090402@nostrum.com>
To: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-Originating-IP: [107.19.188.132]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/idzhmicy5QH98vGboQ0aHNzIIa4
Cc: 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: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 16:42:28 -0000

On Dec 26, 2014, at 11:27 AM, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> wrote:
> Why did you settle on a proposed name for the combined upper-layers area that implies it will be sleeping?

Napt is past tense.   It foreshadows a refreshing awakening, not sleep.

> I would think it would make getting ADs even harder to be asking companies to sponsor an AD of napping.

We could choose a different name.   How about Transport, Applications and Realtime (TAR)?