Re: [ogpx] ogpx Digest, Vol 11, Issue 6

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Thu, 04 March 2010 22:58 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: ogpx@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ogpx@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 810193A8CA3 for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 14:58:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.655
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.655 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.056, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BVWYtHntvS9k for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 14:58:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stpeter.im (stpeter.im [207.210.219.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21C303A8CC6 for <ogpx@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 14:58:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-64-101-72-201.cisco.com (dhcp-64-101-72-201.cisco.com [64.101.72.201]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C4B4340E14 for <ogpx@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 15:58:25 -0700 (MST)
Message-ID: <4B903B10.5020904@stpeter.im>
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:58:24 -0700
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100216 Thunderbird/3.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ogpx@ietf.org
References: <mailman.155.1267732820.3585.ogpx@ietf.org> <adae2d8e1003041256i33081dbeiceb52b146f832af3@mail.gmail.com> <6c9fcc2a1003041340v2c50d6ap68e576c4b9e356ea@mail.gmail.com> <4B902967.9000608@stpeter.im> <b8ef0a221003041436v37b7ff8cre5f95ebc26e1ad11@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <b8ef0a221003041436v37b7ff8cre5f95ebc26e1ad11@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1
OpenPGP: url=http://www.saint-andre.com/me/stpeter.asc
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"; boundary="------------ms070701070103090400000404"
Subject: Re: [ogpx] ogpx Digest, Vol 11, Issue 6
X-BeenThere: ogpx@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Virtual World Region Agent Protocol - IETF working group <ogpx.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx>, <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ogpx>
List-Post: <mailto:ogpx@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx>, <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 22:58:25 -0000

On 3/4/10 3:36 PM, Meadhbh Hamrick wrote:
> why so? some people like IRC and there's a tool that works. why not use it?

Why is Jabber the official IETF IM mechanism? Because that's the
decision that the IETF made 3 or 4 years ago. I don't recall the
reasoning at that time, but for quite some time there have been chat
rooms at jabber.ietf.org. Perhaps most importantly, the IETF Note Well
rules apply there, whereas those rules would not apply to an IRC channel
on Freenode or whatever.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/