Re: Sergeant at arms: please deal with mars.techno.cat@xxxxxxxxx

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

To: Dave Crocker <dhc@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Sergeant at arms: please deal with mars.techno.cat@xxxxxxxxx
From: Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 19:50:15 +0200
Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <5266B4A4.9020301@dcrocker.net>
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)

>> as the ietf is legally f(isoc),
> The IETF is not legally ISOC.

you are correct.  legally, it is a function of isoc.  sorry about the
notational shortening.

randy

Follow-Ups:
- IETF::ISOC (was Re: Sergeant at arms: please deal with mars.techno.cat@xxxxxxxxx)
  - From: Dave Crocker

References:
- Sergeant at arms: please deal with mars.techno.cat@xxxxxxxxx
  - From: Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Sergeant at arms: please deal with mars.techno.cat@xxxxxxxxx
  - From: Techno CAT
- Re: Sergeant at arms: please deal with mars.techno.cat@xxxxxxxxx
  - From: Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Sergeant at arms: please deal with mars.techno.cat@xxxxxxxxx
  - From: Randy Bush
- Re: Sergeant at arms: please deal with mars.techno.cat@xxxxxxxxx
  - From: Dave Crocker

Prev by Date: Re: Sergeant at arms: please deal with mars.techno.cat@xxxxxxxxx
Next by Date: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-dhc-option-guidelines-14.txt> (Guidelines for Creating New DHCPv6 Options) to Best Current Practice
Previous by thread: Re: Sergeant at arms: please deal with mars.techno.cat@xxxxxxxxx
Next by thread: IETF::ISOC (was Re: Sergeant at arms: please deal with mars.techno.cat@xxxxxxxxx)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

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