Re: Next call

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Fri, 02 July 2010 21:40 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: w3c-policy@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: w3c-policy@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C0543A6868 for <w3c-policy@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:40:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.947
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.949, BAYES_50=0.001, NO_RDNS_DOTCOM_HELO=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P8KLFRg+oTw1 for <w3c-policy@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:40:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C6303A67B4 for <w3c-policy@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:40:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wlan-snve-152-225.corp.yahoo.com (unknown [209.131.62.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ADB21509DE for <w3c-policy@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 17:40:47 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
Subject: Re: Next call
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <5061509E-334F-4C11-92DE-337BEBE2487C@mnot.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:40:45 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <18927299-AB3F-4F1B-ABC6-D33E4EFBA9C0@mnot.net>
References: <5061509E-334F-4C11-92DE-337BEBE2487C@mnot.net>
To: W3C/IETF <w3c-policy@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
X-BeenThere: w3c-policy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of w3c-ietf policy issues <w3c-policy.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/w3c-policy>, <mailto:w3c-policy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/w3c-policy>
List-Post: <mailto:w3c-policy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:w3c-policy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/w3c-policy>, <mailto:w3c-policy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 21:40:46 -0000

Right now, we have two participants from the IETF, one from the W3C, and two or three possible time slots.

Anyone else? If no-one wants to come from the US, it does make finding a time simpler...


On 25/06/2010, at 9:59 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:

> It seems like we should have a call before the next IETF meeting, especially considering the HASMAT work and other developments.
> 
> AIUI we need to consider the timezones of the following locations when scheduling:
> 
> - Melbourne
> - Luxembourg 
> - London
> - Boston
> - Denver
> - San Francisco
> - (anywhere someone is travelling)
> 
> Accordingly, someone is going to be "not happy" about the call's time; please take this in consideration when responding to:
>  http://doodle.com/2cvsyi38dxvx868k
> 
> If none of these dates work for you and you need to be on the call, please suggest an alternative date/time.
> 
> Agenda items also welcome, so far I have:
>  - HASMAT IETF BoF
>  - W3C Web Security work
>  - HYBI
>  - Link Relations registry
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
> --
> Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
> 


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/