IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Mtgvenue] Closing on comments to section 5

"Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com> Fri, 10 March 2017 17:56 UTC

Return-Path: <eckelcu@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A02631294C8 for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 09:56:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.523
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.523 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DOe6uuiVaEyz for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 09:56:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68ABE129417 for <mtgvenue@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 09:56:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1938; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1489168610; x=1490378210; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=/OIj57g8AFi+hKmQ7Qgp0IyeHiqcOspWClCcfJtET9Q=; b=mKlWHHeGDkM5kHxktVCaC5Efke8IZpINorxFjEi9QrRgD/5ykaSmzpUD WSmAjpFwClBaV7mzAIVuDIdx8Q8dmMwiTJHfRn4MBfxrpHHdTGxqh4vV6 IUmIOTKOYjO4TAVxccK2859Bn62MXpfSIp/8GJIVJyu6yr43yUyo9n3/M o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AlAgCF6MJY/5JdJa1dGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBBwEBAQEBgycqgWsHg1mKDpEwH5U4gg6GIgIagic/GAECAQEBAQEBAWsohRUBAQEBAyMRUQQCAQgRAwECAQICJgICAjAVCAgCBAESigCxeIImimYBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEdgQuHSAiCYoRUF4JvLoIxAQScPAGSN4F7jymIRIp7AR84gQNXFT8RAYZDdYkNgQ0BAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,141,1486425600"; d="scan'208";a="222459613"
Received: from rcdn-core-10.cisco.com ([173.37.93.146]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Mar 2017 17:56:49 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-016.cisco.com (xch-aln-016.cisco.com [173.36.7.26]) by rcdn-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v2AHunWx025837 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 10 Mar 2017 17:56:49 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-018.cisco.com (173.36.7.28) by XCH-ALN-016.cisco.com (173.36.7.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 11:56:48 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-018.cisco.com ([173.36.7.28]) by XCH-ALN-018.cisco.com ([173.36.7.28]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 11:56:48 -0600
From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, "mtgvenue@ietf.org" <mtgvenue@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Mtgvenue] Closing on comments to section 5
Thread-Index: AQHSmZuaQuDnMt7v/0C2XPDaC6a9haGOOqIA
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 17:56:48 +0000
Message-ID: <9178A00D-48D7-4078-953F-2A5BF2F24774@cisco.com>
References: <9139334c-9c5e-814d-4299-c6f5950039b8@cs.tcd.ie> <f9b2a33d-db49-54a0-a657-be58a08ff021@labn.net> <a1a08b89-9088-07e0-d878-2c171c04602b@cs.tcd.ie> <acc6e92e-954d-0dd5-47bf-d2ffb12756dc@labn.net> <83c13799-43cd-5114-17f0-18f0a87e21fc@labn.net> <86ae8fd8-1394-aa57-ddb8-55ee01301a11@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <86ae8fd8-1394-aa57-ddb8-55ee01301a11@cs.tcd.ie>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.1f.0.170216
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.20.182.35]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <26275F5CD479D644B1C710E48DA5FD03@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mtgvenue/doAF-qIxNVuWRHoQLHZaJwUe_2U>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] Closing on comments to section 5
X-BeenThere: mtgvenue@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for email discussion of the IAOC meeting venue selection process." <mtgvenue.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mtgvenue/>
List-Post: <mailto:mtgvenue@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 17:56:51 -0000

Great, thanks Lou and Stephen.
Eliot holds the pen on this draft. Looking at the diff of Lou’s version from version-04, the only changes are the text captured below plus the inclusion of two appendices, which pull in other existing docs.
Pete and I have asked Eliot to include these changes in his update and submit as version-05 along with text capturing other issues that were previously discussed on this list. You can expect a -05 version to post before the draft deadline.
This draft will serve as the basis for us to discuss next steps when we meet in Chicago.

Cheers,
Charles

-----Original Message-----
From: Mtgvenue <mtgvenue-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Friday, March 10, 2017 at 4:41 AM
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, "mtgvenue@ietf.org" <mtgvenue@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] Closing on comments to section 5

    
    
    On 10/03/17 12:34, Lou Berger wrote:
    > The specific text I propose is:
    > 
    >          This section is intended to define current practice, as it
    >          should be today, but such guidelines will likely need to evolve
    >          over time.  The IAOC may change these guidelines when needed by
    >          publishing updated guidelines and following the normal IETF
    >          consensus process.
    > 
    
    Looks fine to me thanks,
    S.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email