[L2sm] L2SM not meeting in Prague

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Wed, 14 June 2017 15:09 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: l2sm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l2sm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 613CD12EACA; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.62
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.62 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GijCoIXMXtWd; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:09:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB50512EAC1; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:09:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain []) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v5EF9GeE023688; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 16:09:16 +0100
Received: from 950129200 ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v5EF9EPT023669 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 14 Jun 2017 16:09:15 +0100
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: l2sm@ietf.org
Cc: l2sm-ads@ietf.org, l2sm-chairs@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 16:09:12 +0100
Message-ID: <053e01d2e520$2ef2bd60$8cd83820$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AdLlICmqPQzfa7uOQBaH4GgDitKT+g==
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-
X-TM-AS-Result: No--3.350-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--3.350-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: CZ72wFVpXzaBbPV+CHUPNGK/fSJiGWn4UAjrAJWsTe/jsTquy0JRi2pP jHo14Z8H7EUSV1qPmL9kpWeclXMw+RgHZ8655DOPOX/V8P8ail1bCjvvWZW+SZnvQM57TvybUEh Wy9W70AEnRE+fI6etksVSigXDQAmCmemPgu/ZIlwIEuKhGds+IQkw6Z605tWxPzQ+0B2WOUq1db a7WPWT3C7yDsi/aP1Z1xi3E6A4ihnd2r2F9uZmk+h6vUQky8b7LLR5nF3ltXgVUhluC41uNBWJz 0qF3xvHJIWB1QP6/JM=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l2sm/7tkwo-HHwi690t6gs78s-VMwlAg>
Subject: [L2sm] L2SM not meeting in Prague
X-BeenThere: l2sm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The Layer Two Virtual Private Network Service Model \(L2SM\)" <l2sm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/l2sm>, <mailto:l2sm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/l2sm/>
List-Post: <mailto:l2sm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l2sm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2sm>, <mailto:l2sm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 15:09:22 -0000


The IETF agenda space remains very tight, and there are demands for BoFs etc. in

So, given both the low turn-out at the virtual interim and the relatively good
progress we made in that medium, we think that it would not be a good use of
meeting space or of people's time to have a physical L2SM meeting in Prague.

I would encourage those of you who have an interest in this work to meet in the
corridors or over coffee to discuss the work and be able to bring new ideas to
the next virtual interim which we will try to hold in the weeks after Prague.

Adrian and Qin