Re: [IPsec] IPsecME virtual interim meeting

It's much simpler than that: I'm fine with the process, I just got my 
numbers wrong (blush). May 7 is less than 2 weeks in the future.

Instead, I'd like to propose Thursday, May 16, same time. Any objections?

Thanks,
	Yaron

On 2013-04-28 12:07, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
> 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
>