Re: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Future tools call times (was Re: Hello tools-development)

Mark Nottingham <> Tue, 09 April 2019 23:45 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 220191204AD for <>; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 16:45:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=LM/ahdN9; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=7nl9nfN1
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P0raZyb2bICp for <>; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 16:44:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7DF4D12049D for <>; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 16:44:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal []) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1C7A301; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 19:44:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 09 Apr 2019 19:44:56 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=3 o46rmyjZxYf0j8SQ9fR00N5OTqonEHpiBKxI+C27+4=; b=LM/ahdN9hpbJuT+Q/ dn7EntS/cUdh+DFSj/JcKKy/qFpVeMpP0F7NiQ9wi/UPDZo4QptlYLe4V0o5I8dH /1/w8AZchPEoBT1JqlXFMiUuPNu1n5jLhzM8CobuACz4/pR/KWIae5z0PDAHk+QN P4bHuxVNOxO1yXFL+6LHpDBPo7E7gqh6FykgKiTMcCTbkZ0jp1ctmxlRhWbf/kJ2 BJuSHj6zzSBvrTTKqApvZrVyQ1csfXD1JMECXboGuLv3MO6aC3T5iIcACLbatANH nGoQzwCnWNBZ3Ej1ipnk8bDvS6CbCBiRgkXv64YlP4VXQxM9qMKaTF1Wj4deCor8 dh+FA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=3o46rmyjZxYf0j8SQ9fR00N5OTqonEHpiBKxI+C27 +4=; b=7nl9nfN1qSsE6mUc9vjv62rdjd7/civuKDW9BNYsDSLa0hgd/zeio2+st 4iG2ETpRWsPSdmcdOdf/PiQZd+23A3DjBBDYSZMLO5YCi+tz7moxulq7o/g4kazu zIstUH6K2s5VYxadj5JJNJjwNE3OcbNfgZkeGA1qS0fKA+18vQz0+MvG/z3m1l6B 7tmfVwmC45+kyuqRSLKreiTlumjz4NIvVJu10YJGWJSBOJ6Greoo3kpdRU2sW2tJ bGc6I8TaGfYe4d+MS39VVlQp6IPCTqfo9GDQKvtVrSzQU7XWkK0iNXNR/TE2HrX2 0KbFk3hrohJNvXGK6w0fkViw+EQJw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:dy6tXFgggWH9229-iFVbVYLOa4OyduwDwWClfSF4TBJGiShforNrbg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduuddrudeigddvhecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtddvnecuhfhrohhmpeforghrkhcu pfhothhtihhnghhhrghmuceomhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpe hivghtfhdrohhrghdpmhhnohhtrdhnvghtnecukfhppedugeegrddufeeirddujeehrddv keenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvthenucevlh hushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:dy6tXOTKTkkFvHZEiN9m7lQdoJJbQHiPsowWSAlk_gW2SVAyrHJdkw> <xmx:dy6tXAEosITjpRBnQ1mPXkSu09zYpLoWD6z86K0hgfn10S9gaCcoNA> <xmx:dy6tXOn33JAMYWqToYgUTpOET1WSMYbIC0Gtea_20aVsYR_bI9uq4w> <xmx:eC6tXAimn9P19KG357H2tCurosz7iuI49lX8o6iFjj2ctjBHKwAiuQ>
Received: from (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id EF56410319; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 19:44:53 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
From: Mark Nottingham <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 09:44:52 +1000
Cc: IETF Tools Development <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <>
To: Robert Sparks <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Future tools call times (was Re: Hello tools-development)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Tools Development list server <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2019 23:45:00 -0000

Hi Robert,

That's a tough spread. Until I get up to speed and figure out how I can best help, I don't think it's worth inconveniencing others. 

It would probably be good if I had a 1:1 with one or more people to get a better sense of what's going on / what the scope of work is, etc. No particular rush, though.

If it makes sense for me to be on the calls at some later date, the usual times (early morning AU, midday US, late evening EU) are probably best.


> On 10 Apr 2019, at 5:42 am, Robert Sparks <> wrote:
> Hi Mark -
> There was a tools team call today - I figure you missed it because it was at an awful time for where you are on the planet (3am if I did the math right).
> The primary point of the calls is to go over in-flight and upcoming activities to help make it less likely that some of us surprise the rest. Sometimes we make priority adjustments during the calls.
> I think we should discuss the call schedule (but I don't have the token to change it). We have regular participants in Sweden, Belgium, and the range of CONUS timezones. From our experience with trying to schedule IAB calls, I know there's no _good_ time, but is there a time that has worked better than others?
> RjS
> On 4/8/19 6:48 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>> I've just joined the tools-development team, and hope I can add some value; I have some background in systems administration and web ops.
>> I'm just getting up to speed (and would love any pointers to help in that process!), but one immediate question -- in the RFP that just went out, the timeline seems unusually tight. Is there a reason for that?
>> I ask because having such short timelines can severely impact participation.
>> Cheers,
>> --
>> Mark Nottingham
>> _______________________________________________
>> TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT mailing list

Mark Nottingham