Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Tue, 27 August 2013 19:53 UTC
Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.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 698F211E81D6 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 12:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.584
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.584 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.015, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k8+5uIOJuO3z for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 12:53:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og103.obsmtp.com (exprod7og103.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.159]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF70411E81E3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 12:53:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob103.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUh0DqzH4ZwD4FRVxLzr0Djze6+yrs+Nh@postini.com; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 12:53:15 PDT
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 Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BBA51B82C0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 12:53:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2112919006C; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 12:53:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.131]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 12:53:15 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: John Leslie <john@jlc.net>
Subject: Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
Thread-Topic: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
Thread-Index: AQHOoxN06q2ItRANekqU0K4uK4hKvZmpwB4AgAACkgCAAANxgIAAGtOAgAAMXwA=
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 19:53:14 +0000
Message-ID: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775267BF5@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
References: <290E20B455C66743BE178C5C84F12408224060750E@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk> <CADnDZ891f9z=snhx2mP1oqZK+iPih79LDhHrFHu1gjT4mkMbhw@mail.gmail.com> <38BAB050-5B83-4530-84E8-FBF27E822C7F@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <EMEW3|1ad6c5e007d1f092769939d09c0615b9p7QBpW03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|38BAB050-5B83-4530-84E8-FBF27E822C7F@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775267379@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <CAPv4CP8ORvFQXsRV2vZqk46S4+ZkLm+GeV3wxdUvcmZ96yyEVA@mail.gmail.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775267681@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <20130827190857.GA48013@verdi>
In-Reply-To: <20130827190857.GA48013@verdi>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-ID: <E9F0D0D921A26548A83FDAEDAE0592D6@nominum.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 19:53:22 -0000
On Aug 27, 2013, at 3:08 PM, John Leslie <john@jlc.net> wrote: > I feel sorry for Ted, who _does_ have to evaluate consensus here. Actually no, I don't—spfbis is apps area, not int area. Lucky me... :)
- Re: Rude responses Abdussalam Baryun
- RE: Rude responses l.wood
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?) Tim Chown
- Re: Rude responses JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?) JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?) Ted Lemon
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?) Scott Brim
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?) Melinda Shore
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?) Ted Lemon
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?) John Leslie
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?) S Moonesamy
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?) Ted Lemon
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?) Pete Resnick
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?) Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?) S Moonesamy
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?) Phillip Hallam-Baker