Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: John Leslie <john@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 19:53:14 +0000
Accept-language: en-US
Cc: ietf <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20130827190857.GA48013@verdi>
Thread-index: AQHOoxN06q2ItRANekqU0K4uK4hKvZmpwB4AgAACkgCAAANxgIAAGtOAgAAMXwA=
Thread-topic: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)

On Aug 27, 2013, at 3:08 PM, John Leslie <john@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>   I feel sorry for Ted, who _does_ have to evaluate consensus here.

Actually no, I don't—spfbis is apps area, not int area.   Lucky me... :)

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  - From: Pete Resnick

References:
- RE: Rude responses
  - From: l.wood
- Re: Rude responses
  - From: Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  - From: Tim Chown
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  - From: Ted Lemon
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  - From: Scott Brim
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  - From: Ted Lemon
- Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  - From: John Leslie

Prev by Date: Re: I-D Action: draft-sweet-uri-zoneid-00.txt
Next by Date: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-11
Previous by thread: Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
Next by thread: Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [IETF Annoucements] [IETF] [IP Storage] [Yosemite News] [Linux SCTP] [Linux Newbies] [Fedora Users]