Re: [Secdispatch] CCC vs CCC
Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Fri, 01 April 2022 15:44 UTC
Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB9183A1953 for <secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Apr 2022 08:44:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.907
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 sMMc3VyZb13G for <secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Apr 2022 08:44:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BBA93A1831 for <secdispatch@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Apr 2022 08:44:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p5089ad4f.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.173.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4KVPbr5hH0zDCdk; Fri, 1 Apr 2022 17:44:08 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <24924.1648827646@localhost>
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2022 17:44:09 +0200
Cc: secdispatch@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 670520649.285851-fcfef4d7c47dcf46ebc615382c87a3ef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0E2F3CA5-C41E-4C44-8A31-2BEA1D895C8F@tzi.org>
References: <24924.1648827646@localhost>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdispatch/iubxvWxJ8XCKWFWlsL5fzabyaTY>
Subject: Re: [Secdispatch] CCC vs CCC
X-BeenThere: secdispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Dispatch <secdispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdispatch>, <mailto:secdispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/secdispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:secdispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdispatch>, <mailto:secdispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2022 15:44:16 -0000
On 2022-04-01, at 17:40, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote: > > CCC The original is of course: https://www.ccc.de/en/club (Since 1981. I also don’t think any of the other ones has 5500 members.) Grüße, Carsten
- [Secdispatch] CCC vs CCC Michael Richardson
- Re: [Secdispatch] CCC vs CCC Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Secdispatch] CCC vs CCC Brendan Moran