IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Next call

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Fri, 02 July 2010 21:42 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
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 3D8243A6868 for <w3c-policy@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:42:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.53
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.53 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.790, BAYES_20=-0.74]
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 85pnshblzq2I for <w3c-policy@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:42:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (stpeter.im [207.210.219.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44D1D3A67B4 for <w3c-policy@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:42:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-64-101-72-121.cisco.com (dhcp-64-101-72-121.cisco.com [64.101.72.121]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 263BC40E26 for <w3c-policy@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 15:42:23 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <4C2E5D3D.2080707@stpeter.im>
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 15:42:21 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: w3c-policy@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Next call
References: <5061509E-334F-4C11-92DE-337BEBE2487C@mnot.net> <18927299-AB3F-4F1B-ABC6-D33E4EFBA9C0@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <18927299-AB3F-4F1B-ABC6-D33E4EFBA9C0@mnot.net>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1
OpenPGP: url=http://www.saint-andre.com/me/stpeter.asc
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms050102080709030305060300"
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 21:42:13 -0000

Count me in (UTC - 6). I wake up early so even UTC = 13:00 or 12:00 is
fine with me.

On 7/2/10 3:40 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> 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/
> 


-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email