[RADIR] no call today

Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> Tue, 18 March 2008 17:04 UTC

Return-Path: <radir-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-radir-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-radir-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 236F63A683E; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:04:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.527
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.527 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.090, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 suzt1xQekpvF; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F3A23A6CB3; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: radir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: radir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 577A53A6EF9 for <radir@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
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 rTcEsSWfCubH for <radir@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:04:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from e2.ny.us.ibm.com (e2.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.142]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19D3528C6E6 for <radir@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:04:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e2.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m2IH1qJU024370 for <radir@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:01:52 -0400
Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (d01av02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.216]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m2IH1q6d246968 for <radir@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:01:52 -0400
Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m2IH1qbM019272 for <radir@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:01:52 -0400
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (wecm-9-67-194-113.wecm.ibm.com [9.67.194.113]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m2IH1pdE019188 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:01:51 -0400
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (cichlid-new [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.2/8.12.5) with ESMTP id m2IH1osF025527; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:01:50 -0400
Message-Id: <200803181701.m2IH1osF025527@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
To: radir@ietf.org
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:01:50 -0400
From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Olaf Kolkman <olaf@nlnetlabs.nl>
Subject: [RADIR] no call today
X-BeenThere: radir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing and Addressing Directorate <radir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radir>, <mailto:radir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/radir>
List-Post: <mailto:radir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:radir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radir>, <mailto:radir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: radir-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: radir-bounces@ietf.org

I (and Marla) happened to chat with Olaf at the IETF social last
week. He says the IAB has reviewed/discussed the problem statement and
he has a todo to get us written comments (in the next week or so).

The high-level bit was that the "pressures" part of the document was
thought to be good, but that there was some discomfort with the
earlier part around just how serious the "problem" is, how it was
framed, etc. My sense was that this comment was mirroring some of the
broader community spectrum of views and the difficulty of coming to a
clear consensus view.

In any case, I think our next step is to wait for the written
feedback.

Thomas
_______________________________________________
RADIR mailing list
RADIR@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radir