IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [re-ECN] Acronym for BoF / w-g?

<toby.moncaster@bt.com> Tue, 29 September 2009 09:35 UTC

Return-Path: <toby.moncaster@bt.com>
X-Original-To: re-ecn@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: re-ecn@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F7A93A6858 for <re-ecn@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 02:35:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.664
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.664 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.265, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_72=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_91=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 RKGIRhFXr6cC for <re-ecn@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 02:35:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp2.smtp.bt.com (smtp2.smtp.bt.com [217.32.164.150]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5834F3A67ED for <re-ecn@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 02:35:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from E03MVZ1-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net ([193.113.30.61]) by smtp2.smtp.bt.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 29 Sep 2009 10:36:43 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 10:36:41 +0100
Message-ID: <AEDCAF87EEC94F49BA92EBDD49854CC70D4180DA@E03MVZ1-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>
In-Reply-To: <B56BB2A2-AECD-43F0-98D0-1457C86F1FA9@nokia.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [re-ECN] Acronym for BoF / w-g?
Thread-Index: AcpA5cInrrLYt8F6Tum1HePydtkH3AAAesMw
References: <200909281832.n8SIWijX024923@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk> <AEDCAF87EEC94F49BA92EBDD49854CC70D417FCE@E03MVZ1-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net> <AEDCAF87EEC94F49BA92EBDD49854CC70D418041@E03MVZ1-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net> <B56BB2A2-AECD-43F0-98D0-1457C86F1FA9@nokia.com>
From: <toby.moncaster@bt.com>
To: <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Sep 2009 09:36:43.0814 (UTC) FILETIME=[5B147C60:01CA40E8]
Cc: re-ecn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [re-ECN] Acronym for BoF / w-g?
X-BeenThere: re-ecn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: re-inserted explicit congestion notification <re-ecn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn>, <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/re-ecn>
List-Post: <mailto:re-ecn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn>, <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 09:35:25 -0000

As Lars points out we do need to get our priorities straight here (and I
know I am as guilty as anyone of prolonging this discussion...).

My suggestion would be to set up a new doodle with the 3 most popular
choices from the current poll and see if we can converge on an acronym
by tomorrow. Alternatively I would be perfectly happy for Lars to just
choose one of them for us...

Meanwhile I will start 2 new threads to try and sort out a draft agenda
(making an assumption that we get 2 hours of meeting time) and to try
and get the draft charter discussions started again...

Toby

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lars Eggert [mailto:lars.eggert@nokia.com]
> Sent: 29 September 2009 10:18
> To: Moncaster,T,Toby,DER3 R
> Cc: Briscoe,RJ,Bob,XVR9 BRISCORJ R; re-ecn@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [re-ECN] Acronym for BoF / w-g?
> 
> Please, guys. We need less acronym proposals and more decisions. I
> really don't care much what the acronym is, as long as it's a bit
> longer and hopefully a bit more mnemonic than two characters.
> 
> We should really be discussing the BOF agenda and proposed WG charter
> instead of over-optimizing the acronym.
> 
> Lars

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email