Re: INTLOC, IRNSS, and Salt Lake City

Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org> Fri, 15 February 2002 02:07 UTC

Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 18:04:15 -0800
From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
Subject: Re: INTLOC, IRNSS, and Salt Lake City
In-reply-to: <42541853.1013718256@localhost>
To: John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com>, intloc@ops.ietf.org, ietf-irnss@lists.elistx.com
Cc: harald@alvestrand.no
Message-id: <p0510141db8921c83bd36@[165.227.249.20]>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="us-ascii"
References: <42541853.1013718256@localhost>

I think it would be a Good Thing for IRNSS to meet, and to have a 
focused agenda posted two weeks before the meeting. Normally, I am 
not in favor of having face-to-face meetings regulated by someone 
with a whip who is not smiling, but I will strongly favor it again 
for IRNSS.

I see no reason for INTLOC to meet again. The sense of the last BOF 
was one of only mild interest from most of the participants.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium

Re: INTLOC, IRNSS, and Salt Lake City Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
Re: INTLOC, IRNSS, and Salt Lake City John C Klensin
Re: INTLOC, IRNSS, and Salt Lake City Paul Hoffman / IMC
INTLOC, IRNSS, and Salt Lake City John C Klensin