[p2pi] p2pi@ vs. tana@ / alto@ (decomm p2pi@?)
"Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com> Fri, 24 October 2008 17:25 UTC
Return-Path: <p2pi-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: p2pi-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-p2pi-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 433F128C1C4; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 10:25:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: p2pi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: p2pi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C7AD3A6BE4; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 10:25:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.512
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.512 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.884, BAYES_20=-0.74, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368]
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 3OmpKGZr21zI; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 10:24:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pacdcimo01.cable.comcast.com (PacdcIMO01.cable.comcast.com [24.40.8.145]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CF1D28C210; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 10:24:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([24.40.15.92]) by pacdcimo01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id 5503620.17548030; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:25:51 -0400
Received: from PACDCEXCMB04.cable.comcast.com ([24.40.15.86]) by PACDCEXCSMTP03.cable.comcast.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:25:50 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:25:49 -0400
Message-ID: <45AEC6EF95942140888406588E1A660205B9E6FA@PACDCEXCMB04.cable.comcast.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: p2pi@ vs. tana@ / alto@ (decomm p2pi@?)
Thread-Index: Ack1/Y4yiSLvN0WBRzeqo8DIyQ/nXA==
From: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>
To: p2pi@ietf.org, tana@ietf.org, alto-reqs@ubiq.TILAB.COM
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Oct 2008 17:25:50.0884 (UTC) FILETIME=[8F978640:01C935FD]
Subject: [p2pi] p2pi@ vs. tana@ / alto@ (decomm p2pi@?)
X-BeenThere: p2pi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: P2P Infrastructure Discussion <p2pi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi>, <mailto:p2pi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/p2pi>
List-Post: <mailto:p2pi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:p2pi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi>, <mailto:p2pi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: p2pi-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: p2pi-bounces@ietf.org
Seems like there is a lot of cross-posting, and that at least tana@ and alto@ lists are more targeted now. Is it time to deactivate the p2pi@ mailing list? Jason _______________________________________________ p2pi mailing list p2pi@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi
- [p2pi] p2pi@ vs. tana@ / alto@ (decomm p2pi@?) Livingood, Jason
- Re: [p2pi] [tana] p2pi@ vs. tana@ / alto@ (decomm… Stanislav Shalunov