Re: [rtcweb] Agenda for RTCWeb Interim May 19-20, 2014

Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> Fri, 09 May 2014 18:43 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@iii.ca>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0D611A01F3 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 May 2014 11:43:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 3J-ZEnwzrJX2 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 May 2014 11:43:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4F241A0306 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 May 2014 11:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.4.110] (unknown [128.107.239.235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6C95450A84; Fri, 9 May 2014 14:42:31 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <CAHBDyN4LE91dwtj2aJPPMHVP8nJdmVdD3yKzVPpvETA97DTWkw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 12:45:07 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4D09A5E9-01BA-49B8-9CD6-09C93C561E59@iii.ca>
References: <DC7F85E4-B6AD-4874-9E11-FC30809DAD96@iii.ca> <CAHBDyN6=f0LntDt+3hBrcMafYmbr9nVF5vgteVf0G-JCERtmEA@mail.gmail.com> <00B57139-F6A6-48B4-969D-A90EAF638062@iii.ca> <CAHBDyN713=3xajzdzgGox--gj3+gvy2TLKZjucfb1gYL35_hjg@mail.gmail.com> <682CE2BB-F20A-4A87-A4FC-B686CD581743@iii.ca> <CAHBDyN7BOr5bcmf2J3ooooPu-UW+oL-rsUy9XBT76dMeWuZ2PA@mail.gmail.com> <C2C90B6B-A2C0-4EE4-ACCF-AFF34AD88714@iii.ca> <CAHBDyN4LE91dwtj2aJPPMHVP8nJdmVdD3yKzVPpvETA97DTWkw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/Egn9KJxDo5eOKgb_xJ1wPM7WPdY
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Agenda for RTCWeb Interim May 19-20, 2014
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 18:43:05 -0000

ok, glad to see it is sorted out and sorry if we caused confusion. I think Teds mail was saying “how” not “if” we would do remote was depended on number of people. We always done our best to make remote work. 



On May 9, 2014, at 12:40 PM, Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, the answer to my question initially was that the remote participation was going to depend upon who would be attending, so it wasn't clear to me there was any original intent to support remote participation.  I've chatted with Ted and I'm satisfied that you guys will do the best you can based upon the location where you are meeting.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mary. 
> 
> 
> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> wrote:
> 
> On May 9, 2014, at 9:03 AM, Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > It certainly would have been nice to know when the meeting was being organized that there were no plans for remote participation nor recording.
> 
> Mary that is really warping what I said out of context.  We will do the best that we can - and like most IETF interim meetings, including the CLUE ones, that will almost certainly be less than ideal.
> 
>