Re: [IPsec] IPsecME virtual interim meeting

Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> Sun, 28 April 2013 09:08 UTC

Return-Path: <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 461F121F998D for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 02:08:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 6U2uSdJJXXOC for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 02:08:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DCFB21F9977 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 02:08:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.27]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx002) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MaXUl-1UCnRC0PBx-00K9vD for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 11:08:03 +0200
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 28 Apr 2013 09:08:02 -0000
Received: from a88-115-219-140.elisa-laajakaista.fi (EHLO [192.168.100.200]) [88.115.219.140] by mail.gmx.net (mp027) with SMTP; 28 Apr 2013 11:08:02 +0200
X-Authenticated: #29516787
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18XooAb+SgXwvNTj6XoJ5nioA0q43d50ebhKp11f0 zr8ptPki/P5jqu
Message-ID: <517CE6EE.9010901@gmx.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 12:07:58 +0300
From: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130329 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <517C0490.9010600@gmail.com> <9116.1367108277@sandelman.ca> <517CCDB0.3060901@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <517CCDB0.3060901@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: IPsecme WG <ipsec@ietf.org>, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net
Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPsecME virtual interim meeting
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 09:08:06 -0000

Hi Yaron,

The issue is that it has to be announcement by the IESG secretary 2 
weeks in advance.

End of last year I suggested to simplify the rules for virtual interim 
meetings but my proposal was not well received, see
http://list-archives.org/2012/12/03/ietf-ietf-org/simplifying-our-processes-conference-calls/f/1357342837

For some people it seems very important that the call conference call is 
announced on the IETF announcement list. It appears that there are 
people who are not on the working group mailing lists but would like to 
participate in conference calls.

For that reason just announcing it on the mailing list does not count.

Ciao
Hannes

On 04/28/2013 10:20 AM, Yaron Sheffer wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> formally yes, we only need 2 weeks' notice for a conference call:
> http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/interim-meetings.html
>
> But the date is not (yet) set in stone. Let us know if you cannot attend
> for any reason.
>
> Thanks,
>      Yaron
>
> On 2013-04-28 03:17, Michael Richardson wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> "Yaron" == Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com> writes:
>>      Yaron> We propose to meet May 7, at 9:00am PST (16:00 UTC, 12:00
>> noon EST, 19:00
>>      Yaron> Israel) for 1 hour. We will publish a bridge number a week
>>      Yaron> before the meeting.
>>
>> okay.
>> Is that enough notice?
>>
>> I agree that the problem likely needs be solved in a standard way.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> IPsec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec