IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ietf108planning] Assessment criteria for decision on in-person/virtual IETF 108

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Sun, 19 April 2020 01:52 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.com>
X-Original-To: ietf108planning@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf108planning@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 988BB3A1615; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 18:52:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 Hf9qPG86pVPV; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 18:52:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B91F33A0CE4; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 18:52:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.10] (unknown [181.45.84.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9BE5480831; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 03:52:19 +0200 (CEST)
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>, Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>, ietf108planning@ietf.org
References: <158708131208.11834.5712314090867877950@ietfa.amsl.com> <7DB76076-F012-4738-B397-49303DCD81E4@gmail.com> <CAOj+MMF7C6mKDNURigi2XUJCctCGMFf6HFrUb6u-1CzPD_ESAw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <b93f58d6-2e6b-4928-bb3d-a896d7fa1040@si6networks.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 21:53:52 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMF7C6mKDNURigi2XUJCctCGMFf6HFrUb6u-1CzPD_ESAw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf108planning/zhqPLNcHKmXtVCC7DllAu7qRWVw>
Subject: Re: [Ietf108planning] Assessment criteria for decision on in-person/virtual IETF 108
X-BeenThere: ietf108planning@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf108planning.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf108planning>, <mailto:ietf108planning-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf108planning/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf108planning@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf108planning-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf108planning>, <mailto:ietf108planning-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 01:52:27 -0000

On 17/4/20 10:59, Robert Raszuk wrote:
>  > I am not sure which is the best venue
> 
> webex ?

Useful. Although ironic for the IETF to use an ipv4-only technology.

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email