John, > On Mar 11, 2020, at 7:20 PM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > --On Wednesday, March 11, 2020 18:54 -0400 Phillip Hallam-Baker > <phill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Keep them for Madrid which will now be IETF 107. >> >> Of course, now that I have pointed that out, a virtual IETF >> may well be inescapable even if it is only a proforma virtual >> plenary. >> >> That would address John's point about seating the new IESG. > > Just my opinion, but I don't think you can have it both ways. > If the new IESG (and so on) are seated this month, as I think we > are all expecting it will be, then that is IETF 107, no matter > how virtual. I published the tentative agenda for 6MAN w.g. earlier today, I called it the: Virtual Vancouver IETF 107 Meeting Bob
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
