Re: Proposed New Note Well

"Scott O. Bradner" <sob@sobco.com> Tue, 22 March 2016 09:23 UTC

Return-Path: <sob@sobco.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 D591612D701 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 02:23:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 8mt0MK7d2uvZ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 02:23:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sobco.sobco.com (unknown [136.248.127.164]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3943C12D6BE for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 02:23:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sobco.sobco.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92049196B87C; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 05:23:44 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at sobco.com
Received: from sobco.sobco.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (sobco.sobco.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8e9opO9s9VlS; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 05:23:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from golem.sobco.com (golem.sobco.com [136.248.127.162]) by sobco.sobco.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EDD2E196B86C; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 05:23:43 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\))
Subject: Re: Proposed New Note Well
From: "Scott O. Bradner" <sob@sobco.com>
In-Reply-To: <2061005430.4387801.1458611809564.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 05:23:43 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2D2F3F03-8A8E-4515-A93F-208C0398D8C4@sobco.com>
References: <56F09C8C.4060104@gmail.com> <2061005430.4387801.1458611809564.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
To: lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/ychKT5n4MLc7LA1mnqDo-ndlYzc>
Cc: "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: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 09:23:48 -0000

the IETF rules address the individual participant

Scott

> On Mar 21, 2016, at 9:56 PM, lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> 
> What about participating in the IETF by proxy,
> which is what corporations do?
> 
>  
> Lloyd Wood lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk http://about.me/lloydwood 
> 
> 
> From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
> To: ietf@ietf.org 
> Sent: Tuesday, 22 March 2016, 12:14
> Subject: Re: Proposed New Note Well
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I could live with this, although I am still happy enough with the old version.
> 
> > By participating in the IETF,
> 
> I think this should say
> 
> By participating in the IETF in person, remotely, or on-line,
> 
> > ​BCP 25 (Working Group processes)
> > BCP 25 (Anti-Harassment Procedures)
> 
> Why two separate lines, when BCP 9 (6 different RFCs) only gets one line?
> 
> Regards
>   Brian
> 
>