Re: a thought for the nom-com part of poised
Mike O'Dell <mo@uunet.uu.net> Mon, 31 July 1995 17:27 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17514; 31 Jul 95 13:27 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17510; 31 Jul 95 13:27 EDT
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa18006; 31 Jul 95 13:27 EDT
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17490; 31 Jul 95 13:27 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17486; 31 Jul 95 13:27 EDT
Received: from [153.39.130.10] by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17994; 31 Jul 95 13:27 EDT
Received: by rodan.UU.NET id QQzauf04754; Mon, 31 Jul 1995 13:27:51 -0400
Message-Id: <QQzauf04754.199507311727@rodan.UU.NET>
To: Scott Bradner <sob@ndtl.harvard.edu>
cc: kasten@ftp.com, poised@tis.com, iesg@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Subject: Re: a thought for the nom-com part of poised
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 31 Jul 1995 12:00:22 EDT." <199507311600.MAA13714@ndtl.harvard.edu>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 13:27:50 -0400
X-Orig-Sender: iesg-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Mike O'Dell <mo@uunet.uu.net>
While I agree with Scott, I'm not sure whether the enthusiasm in his response was more adulation or insult. (biiiiiig grin) More seriously, while my august co-AD has been (and remains) a pleasure to work with, I can imagine others about whom I (or he) might have a different opinion. Having that opinion considered by the NOMCOM would be, at least, a meaningful courtesy. -mo
- Re: a thought for the nom-com part of poised Mike O'Dell
- Re: a thought for the nom-com part of poised Scott Bradner