IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] IAB Seeks Feedback on Independent Submissions Editor

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Tue, 17 September 2019 20:13 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DDBC12010D for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 13:13:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0HNrD6Qkty9r for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 13:13:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 546B9120072 for <rfc-interest-archive-eekabaiReiB1@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 13:13:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C149B80BCC; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 13:12:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9473AB80BCC for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 13:12:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XpSmqSV0IP87 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 13:12:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.elandsys.com (mx.elandsys.com [162.213.2.210]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6DACB80BC9 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 13:12:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.elandsys.com ([102.115.183.151]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPSA id x8HKCQQu001820 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 17 Sep 2019 13:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1568751176; x=1568837576; i=@elandsys.com; bh=KHP+gGtLj2rXKpKvGJGG4jy9GQ3knU6TJFn3dwxY92c=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=Gba1arej0S1208O+Q9IL3AUxAeH/guZDuvKfUakOSKNh6xim/xim59XIGCPW7xokr osuxgjnlvMFHhcNwZPwskkivXOtjdstnNAL9oCaZbX36BST8FJeE6W60E/c6PJJT5z NYGdWleTUZchctn4vJ3aDLG+ZxA3kVEL4i2QsEkk=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20190917123649.091a3d98@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 13:10:59 -0700
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+9kkMCQ1EyWzxY0bFFDFSuk_sQCkaXoGb7B1mBfW2OVeinAOQ@mail.g mail.com>
References: <156814308493.22374.12964350262219210658.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20190914025849.0be3ad18@elandnews.com> <CA+9kkMCQ1EyWzxY0bFFDFSuk_sQCkaXoGb7B1mBfW2OVeinAOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] IAB Seeks Feedback on Independent Submissions Editor
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

Hi Ted,
At 08:17 AM 17-09-2019, Ted Hardie wrote:
>While it is up to you to judge the potential for conflict of 
>interest, other members for the ISEB have done so while disclosing 
>the position.  You may wish to consider if you would like to that 
>route instead.

Thanks for the feedback and the explanation about the point of the 
call.  Hopefully, people will have a better view of what feedback to provide.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy  

_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email