Re: China venue survey

From: Melinda Shore <shore at arsc.edu>
To: "HUANG, ZHIHUI (JERRY), ATTLABS" <jhuang1 at att.com>
Cc: "ietf at ietf.org list" <ietf at ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:58:03 -0800
In-reply-to: <2FFFD6E98F51BE43878BFED80215F838042326C2 at misout7msgusr7a.ugd.att.com>
References: <mailman.3221.1253327041.4737.ietf at ietf.org> <7F9A6D26EB51614FBF9F81C0DA4CFEC80190AD328350 at il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com> <Pine.GSO.4.63.0909190545070.7372 at pita.cisco.com> <7F9A6D26EB51614FBF9F81C0DA4CFEC80190AD328358 at il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com><Pine.GSO.4.63.0909190906000.25425 at pita.cisco.com> <4AB93B4D.8010704 at stpeter.im> <2FFFD6E98F51BE43878BFED80215F838042326C2 at misout7msgusr7a.ugd.att.com>

On Sep 22, 2009, at 1:52 PM, HUANG, ZHIHUI (JERRY), ATTLABS wrote:

The answer is probably 'No'. And that would be a correct answerbecause
IETF meeting and podium are not the proper platform for such
discussions.


Actually, the correct answer is "no" because
those are all historical actions.  The issue
under discussion is the consequences of
discussing/criticizing contemporary practices
and policies.  And like it or not, the IETF's
work does overlap with policy questions -
telecomm, crypto, etc.

Melinda

References:
- Re: China venue survey
  - From: Yaron Sheffer
- Re: China venue survey
  - From: Ole Jacobsen
- RE: China venue survey
  - From: Yaron Sheffer
- RE: China venue survey
  - From: Ole Jacobsen
- Re: China venue survey
  - From: Peter Saint-Andre
- RE: China venue survey
  - From: HUANG, ZHIHUI (JERRY), ATTLABS

Prev by Date: RE: China venue survey
Next by Date: RE: China venue survey
Previous by thread: RE: China venue survey
Next by thread: RE: China venue survey
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: China venue survey

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.