Re: [MEDIACTRL] Do we need time in Beijing?

Eric Burger <> Sun, 26 September 2010 02:18 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id AABC93A68F1 for <>; Sat, 25 Sep 2010 19:18:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.436
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.436 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.163, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rFk8VpqCJ0L6 for <>; Sat, 25 Sep 2010 19:18:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 767453A682C for <>; Sat, 25 Sep 2010 19:18:58 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default;; h=Received:From:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:To:References:Message-Id:X-Mailer:X-Source:X-Source-Args:X-Source-Dir; b=QSzEPgeEVNrRXm36RVy8kQpd/s0Uu1CRk/3Owecq1ypgix+OpDPs4gCX4+4KqCb+r7FHups+vaKD5WKIj/nqNrIEZyarqhdHHwXb19MSZA6MrRgBkIZIfWTWeE77Cz3x;
Received: from ([] helo=[]) by with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <>) id 1Ozgpo-0006Zr-Tc for; Sat, 25 Sep 2010 19:19:25 -0700
From: Eric Burger <>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary=Apple-Mail-5-70208983; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2010 22:19:30 -0400
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Message-Id: <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname -
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain -
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain -
Subject: Re: [MEDIACTRL] Do we need time in Beijing?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Control WG Discussion List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:18:59 -0000

Let's put it another way: we are very close to being finished.

If I was a jerk, I would say, "If the documents are not done in the next two weeks, we meet, and whoever shows up gets to be the editor and get attribution for the work."

Of course, I am not a jerk.

Well, I can be.

Let's get this done!

BTW, I will be in Beijing, so no issue for me...

On Sep 25, 2010, at 4:47 PM, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote:
> [as chair]
> Do we need a session in Beijing?  The deadline for requesting a session is upon us (Monday).
> The Datatracker says that we have several finished RFCs, one draft in IESG evaluation (which we've been seeing progress on), two that the IESG thinks need work, and two drafts that "exist".  My sense is that author bandwidth is the limiting resource at the moment.
> The only one draft has been updated since Maastricht and only two since Anaheim.
> Will a session in Beijing help move things along?
> Dale