[yam] scheduling conflicts for upcoming YAM meeting

Tony Hansen <tony@att.com> Sat, 06 February 2010 20:03 UTC

Return-Path: <tony@att.com>
X-Original-To: yam@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: yam@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AC883A6C62 for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Feb 2010 12:03:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.119
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.119 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.480, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 N0UII0KiqATZ for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Feb 2010 12:03:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail129.messagelabs.com (mail129.messagelabs.com [216.82.250.147]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 899503A68E8 for <yam@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Feb 2010 12:03:07 -0800 (PST)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: tony@att.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-14.tower-129.messagelabs.com!1265486641!19123116!1
X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.4; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [144.160.20.146]
Received: (qmail 28142 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2010 20:04:02 -0000
Received: from sbcsmtp7.sbc.com (HELO mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) (144.160.20.146) by server-14.tower-129.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 6 Feb 2010 20:04:02 -0000
Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o16K3sdR006309 for <yam@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Feb 2010 15:03:54 -0500
Received: from klpd017.kcdc.att.com (klpd017.kcdc.att.com [135.188.40.86]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o16K3oep006296 for <yam@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Feb 2010 15:03:50 -0500
Received: from kcdc.att.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by klpd017.kcdc.att.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o16K3uUi026739 for <yam@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Feb 2010 14:03:56 -0600
Received: from maillennium.att.com (mailgw1.maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by klpd017.kcdc.att.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o16K3r9J026729 for <yam@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Feb 2010 14:03:54 -0600
Received: from [135.70.170.129] (vpn-135-70-170-129.vpn.mwst.att.com[135.70.170.129]) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with ESMTP id <20100206200353gw100m6be8e> (Authid: tony); Sat, 6 Feb 2010 20:03:53 +0000
X-Originating-IP: [135.70.170.129]
Message-ID: <4B6DCB29.8060104@att.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2010 15:03:53 -0500
From: Tony Hansen <tony@att.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Yet Another Mail Working Group <yam@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [yam] scheduling conflicts for upcoming YAM meeting
X-BeenThere: yam@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Yet Another Mail working group discussion list <yam.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/yam>
List-Post: <mailto:yam@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2010 20:03:08 -0000

It's time to schedule the YAM meeting for Anaheim. What conflicts does 
everyone want us to avoid?

My initial list is:

    primary
	APP	apparea
	APP	httpbis
	APP	idnabis
	APP	morg
	APP	sieve
	SEC	sasl
	SEC	dkim
	APP	eai
	RAI	xmpp
	APP	alto

    secondary
	APP	ogpx
	APP	vcarddav
	APP	oauth

Any other conflicts we should avoid?

	Tony Hansen
	tony@att.com