Re: [MEDIACTRL] Do we need time in Beijing?
"McGlashan, Scott" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Mon, 27 September 2010 16:30 UTC
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68A403A6BB7 for <email@example.com>; Mon, 27 Sep 2010 09:30:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([22.214.171.124]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oqx6Zx2WUSuQ for <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Mon, 27 Sep 2010 09:30:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from g4t0015.houston.hp.com (g4t0015.houston.hp.com [126.96.36.199]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6E0A3A6B6E for <email@example.com>; Mon, 27 Sep 2010 09:30:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from G6W0641.americas.hpqcorp.net (g6w0641.atlanta.hp.com [188.8.131.52]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by g4t0015.houston.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7033C87F6; Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:30:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from G6W0644.americas.hpqcorp.net (184.108.40.206) by G6W0641.americas.hpqcorp.net (220.127.116.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 18.104.22.168; Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:30:12 +0000
Received: from GVW1124EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net ([22.214.171.124]) by G6W0644.americas.hpqcorp.net ([126.96.36.199]) with mapi; Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:30:12 +0000
From: "McGlashan, Scott" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Eric Burger <email@example.com>, "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:29:15 +0000
Thread-Topic: [MEDIACTRL] Do we need time in Beijing?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: Re: [MEDIACTRL] Do we need time in Beijing?
List-Id: Media Control WG Discussion List <mediactrl.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mediactrl>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mediactrl>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:30:12 -0000
Yes Sir! I'll work to your 2 week deadline for the mixer and ivr packages - they are in progress, so expect more questions to the mailing list over the next few days. I'll not be in Beijing unfortunately, but can attend remotely. Scott On 26/09/2010 04:19, "Eric Burger" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >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