Re: NomCom eligibility & IETF 107

To: Pete Resnick <resnick@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: NomCom eligibility & IETF 107
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz=40akamai.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 14:15:01 +0000
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <89730DD8-0451-4658-A0CD-83A85E2055FE@episteme.net>
References: <CALaySJ+kFVXrVAkYLaO6MaPqDA29MzXhVFcxG0c6hZcBs-LqnQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAC4RtVAhfFLYwzqw6Qch3BpuMvqjZPzFJ5o1iTOwR+yqH8j-Aw@mail.gmail.com> <CAC4RtVCzMPGuunYZBCSh90ddY2kKJ_Hqnot0s1jmhNQ7qT0xkg@mail.gmail.com> <89730DD8-0451-4658-A0CD-83A85E2055FE@episteme.net>
User-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802

I strongly agree with what Pete and others have said.

Between this and the RFC-Ed WG decision, it's not a good month for the IETF.

References:
- NomCom eligibility & IETF 107
  - From: Barry Leiba
- Re: NomCom eligibility & IETF 107
  - From: Barry Leiba
- Re: NomCom eligibility & IETF 107
  - From: Barry Leiba
- Re: NomCom eligibility & IETF 107
  - From: Pete Resnick