IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rfcplusplus] venue for follow-up discussion

Heather Flanagan <rse@rfc-editor.org> Wed, 18 July 2018 01:31 UTC

Return-Path: <rse@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: rfcplusplus@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfcplusplus@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C993813102C for <rfcplusplus@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 18:31:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 FbKOjyL40u-8 for <rfcplusplus@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 18:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD484130E18 for <rfcplusplus@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 18:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00CA21C92FA; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 18:30:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fr65sUpdLd_d; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 18:30:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [100.110.214.145] (237.sub-174-206-38.myvzw.com [174.206.38.237]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B3CA31C92B8; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 18:30:54 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Heather Flanagan <rse@rfc-editor.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (15G77)
In-Reply-To: <75c8b019-2c05-bf82-1f95-5300f56ca569@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 21:31:03 -0400
Cc: rfcplusplus@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A9B03011-30D0-4193-9142-6A264306B19C@rfc-editor.org>
References: <75c8b019-2c05-bf82-1f95-5300f56ca569@mozilla.com>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@mozilla.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfcplusplus/QhN65lMsztNOfd6Jfi5Q1ZDpSiA>
Subject: Re: [Rfcplusplus] venue for follow-up discussion
X-BeenThere: rfcplusplus@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: For discussion of the RFC++ BoF proposal and related ideas <rfcplusplus.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rfcplusplus>, <mailto:rfcplusplus-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfcplusplus/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfcplusplus@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfcplusplus-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rfcplusplus>, <mailto:rfcplusplus-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 01:31:10 -0000

Hi Peter,

Great question! I would recommend the discussion move over to rfc-interest. I think the mono-focus of the BoF list has served its purpose. 

Thanks,
Heather

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 17, 2018, at 6:22 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@mozilla.com> wrote:
> 
> Now that the BoF has passed, what is the most appropriate venue for
> follow-up discussion? Would that be this list or rfc-interest [1] or
> something else?
> 
> Peter
> 
> [1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rfcplusplus mailing list
> Rfcplusplus@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rfcplusplus

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email