IETF Discussion Archive - Thread Index

• Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), (continued)
  • Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), Theodore Tso
  • Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), todd glassey
  • Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), todd glassey
  • Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
  • Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), todd glassey
  • Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
  • Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), todd glassey
  • RE: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), Fleischman, Eric
  • Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
  • Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), Theodore Tso
  • Complaints and complainers (Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea)), Harald Alvestrand
  • Re: Complaints and complainers (Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea)), Ned Freed
  • Re: Complaints and complainers, todd glassey
  • Re: Complaints and complainers, Ned Freed
  • The Delete button [Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea)], Brian E Carpenter
  • Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), Steven M. Bellovin
  • Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), todd glassey
  • Complaints and "rights" (was: Re: WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea)), John C Klensin
  • RE: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), Susan Thomson \(sethomso\)
    • RE: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), Narayanan, Vidya
  • RE: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), Narayanan, Vidya
  • Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), Noel Chiappa
    • Due process [Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea)], Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: Due process [Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea)], todd glassey
  • RE: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), Gray, Eric
  • Re:[Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), yinhan 34728
  • RE: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), Khosravi, Hormuzd M
    • Message not available
      • RE: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea), Lakshminath Dondeti
• MLTF meeting before IGF, Jefsey_Morfin
  • Re: MLTF meeting before IGF, Ted Hardie
    • Re: MLTF meeting before IGF, Jefsey_Morfin
    • Re: MLTF meeting before IGF, Harald Alvestrand
    • Re: MLTF meeting before IGF, John C Klensin
      • Re: MLTF meeting before IGF, Theodore Tso
• Out-of-Office AutoReply: New Version Notification -, Ted Hardie
• Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Iljitsch van Beijnum
  • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Steven M. Bellovin
    • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Iljitsch van Beijnum
    • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Fred Baker
      • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to InformationalRFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), todd glassey
      • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Jefsey_Morfin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Steven M. Bellovin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Iljitsch van Beijnum
      • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Fred Baker
      • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Iljitsch van Beijnum
      • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Fred Baker
      • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Iljitsch van Beijnum
      • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Joe Abley
  • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Pekka Savola
    • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Steven M. Bellovin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Iljitsch van Beijnum
      • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Steven M. Bellovin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Iljitsch van Beijnum
      • Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385), Pekka Savola
• IETF-related spam from JFC Morfin, Tony Finch
  • Re: IETF-related spam from JFC Morfin, Jefsey_Morfin
    • Re: IETF-related spam from JFC Morfin, Theodore Tso
      • Re: IETF-related spam from JFC Morfin, Tony Finch
      • Re: IETF-related spam from JFC Morfin, David Kessens
• As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Eliot Lear
  • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Sam Hartman
    • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, John C Klensin
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Ned Freed
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Keith Moore
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Eliot Lear
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Keith Moore
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Eliot Lear
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Keith Moore
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, John Leslie
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, John C Klensin
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, C. M. Heard
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, bmanning
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Eliot Lear
      • draft-carpenter-rfc2026-critique-02.txt (was: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis), C. M. Heard
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Brian E Carpenter
      • Message not available
      • Message not available
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, John C Klensin
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, John C Klensin
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Jeffrey Hutzelman
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Douglas Otis
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Eliot Lear
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Eliot Lear
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Keith Moore
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Eliot Lear
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Keith Moore
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Eliot Lear
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Dave Cridland
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, John C Klensin
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Eric Rosen
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Eliot Lear
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Jeffrey Hutzelman
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, John C Klensin
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Thomas Narten
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Sam Hartman
      • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Frank Ellermann
  • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Frank Ellermann
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis, Bob Braden
• Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Frank Ellermann
  • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Fred Baker
    • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Frank Ellermann
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Stig Venaas
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), John C Klensin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Stig Venaas
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Frank Ellermann
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), John C Klensin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Jeffrey Hutzelman
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Mark Andrews
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Jeffrey Hutzelman
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Jefsey_Morfin
    • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Dave Crocker
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), John C Klensin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Dave Crocker
      • Re: Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Bill Fenner
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Dave Crocker
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), David W. Hankins
      • "zone" is not a DNS name semantic, Dave Crocker
      • Re: "zone" is not a DNS name semantic, David W. Hankins
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), John C Klensin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), John C Klensin
    • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Matt Larson
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Harald Alvestrand
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Matt Larson
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Keith Moore
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), John C Klensin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain), Ralph Droms
• RE: Comments on draft-dusseault-caldav-15 anddraft-newman-i18n-comparator-14, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• 25th Anniversary!, rpelletier
  • References to XML 'documents', Tom.Petch
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: 25th Anniversary!, Noel Chiappa
  • Re: 25th Anniversary!, Bob Braden
    • Re: 25th Anniversary!, Jeffrey I. Schiller
    • Re: 25th Anniversary!, Dave Crocker
    • Re: 25th Anniversary!, stephen wolff
  • RE: 25th Anniversary!, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: 25th Anniversary!, Bob Braden
    • Re: 25th Anniversary!, Andrew G. Malis
      • Re: 25th Anniversary!, Ole Jacobsen
      • Re: 25th Anniversary!, Andrew G. Malis
      • Re: 25th Anniversary!, Dave Crocker
• Siemens to Host IETF 67, rpelletier
  • Re: Siemens to Host IETF 67, Fred Baker
• Out-of-Office AutoReply: I-D was expired, Ted Hardie
• Comments on draft-dusseault-caldav-15 and draft-newman-i18n-comparator-14, Julian Reschke
  • Re: Comments on draft-dusseault-caldav-15 and draft-newman-i18n-comparator-14, Arnt Gulbrandsen
  • Re: Comments on draft-dusseault-caldav-15 and draft-newman-i18n-comparator-14, Sam Hartman
  • Re: Comments on draft-dusseault-caldav-15 and draft-newman-i18n-comparator-14, Lisa Dusseault
    • Re: Comments on draft-dusseault-caldav-15 and draft-newman-i18n-comparator-14, Arnt Gulbrandsen
    • Re: Comments on draft-dusseault-caldav-15 and draft-newman-i18n-comparator-14, Frank Ellermann
    • Re: Comments on draft-dusseault-caldav-15 and draft-newman-i18n-comparator-14, John C Klensin
      • Re: Comments on draft-dusseault-caldav-15 and draft-newman-i18n-comparator-14, Harald Alvestrand
      • IDN effort has ballooned in scope without involving relevant additional review, Sam Hartman
    • Re: Comments on draft-dusseault-caldav-15 and draft-newman-i18n-comparator-14, bmanning
• RFC/Protocol Quantification, Sreevathsa
  • Re: RFC/Protocol Quantification, Frank Ellermann
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RFC/Protocol Quantification, Sreevathsa
• Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Sam Hartman
  • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Theodore Tso
    • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Jefsey_Morfin
  • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), David Kessens
    • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Sam Hartman
    • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Dave Crocker
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), John C Klensin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Harald Alvestrand
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Steven M. Bellovin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Dave Crocker
      • the pattern on this list (was: Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683)), Keith Moore
      • Re: the pattern on this list (was: Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683)), Jefsey_Morfin
    • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), John Leslie
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Margaret Wasserman
  • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Tom.Petch
    • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Brian E Carpenter
    • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Robert Elz
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), John C Klensin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Jeffrey Hutzelman
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Brian E Carpenter
  • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Robert Elz
    • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Brian E Carpenter
    • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Robert Elz
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), John C Klensin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Ned Freed
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Ned Freed
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' toBCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Tom.Petch
      • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Robert Elz
  • Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683), Harald Alvestrand
• Newtrk and ISDs (was: Re: Facts, please not handwaving ..., Scott Bradner
  • Looking forward not back, Sam Hartman
    • Re: Looking forward not back, John C Klensin
• Newtrk and ISDs (was: Re: Facts, please not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], John C Klensin
  • Re: Newtrk and ISDs (was: Re: Facts, please not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Fred Baker
    • Re: Newtrk and ISDs (was: Re: Facts, please not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Jefsey_Morfin
    • Re: Newtrk and ISDs, Frank Ellermann
• IANA XML registries, JFC Morfin
  • BCCed messages, was Re: IANA XML registries, Tony Finch
  • Re: IANA XML registries, Peter Dambier
    • Re: IANA XML registries, Jefsey_Morfin
• Re: The BOF wiki, Dave Crocker
• Re: [Ltru] IANA XML registries, JFC Morfin
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] IANA XML registries, JFC Morfin
• RE: security features.... (Re: Facts, please), Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • Re: security features.... (Re: Facts, please), Harald Alvestrand
  • Re: security features.... (Re: Facts, please), Sam Hartman
  • Re: security features.... (Re: Facts, please), Russ Allbery
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: security features.... (Re: Facts, please), Gray, Eric
• RE: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Gray, Eric
  • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Dave Crocker
    • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Dave Cridland
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Jefsey_Morfin
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Sam Hartman
• RE: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], grenville armitage
  • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Robert Sayre
    • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Russ Allbery
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Robert Sayre
      • security features.... (Re: Facts, please), Harald Alvestrand
      • Re: security features.... (Re: Facts, please), Tony Finch
      • Re: security features.... (Re: Facts, please), Robert Sayre
      • Re: security features.... (Re: Facts, please), Jeffrey Altman
      • Re: security features.... (Re: Facts, please), Dave Cridland
  • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Brian E Carpenter
    • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Eliot Lear
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Henning Schulzrinne
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Dave Crocker
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Sam Hartman
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Brian E Carpenter
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Eliot Lear
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Eliot Lear
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Eliot Lear
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Sam Hartman
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Spencer Dawkins
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Scott Bradner
• Flaw in the design of NoteWell makes Notewell Not Well., todd glassey
  • Re: Flaw in the design of NoteWell makes Notewell Not Well., Bill Strahm
    • Re: Flaw in the design of NoteWell makes Notewell Not Well., Dave Crocker
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Flaw in the design of NoteWell makes Notewell Not Well., Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process, Andy Bierman
    • Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process, todd glassey
      • Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an openElection Process, todd glassey
      • Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process, Theodore Tso
  • Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Brian E Carpenter
    • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Eliot Lear
      • Re: Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Bill Fenner
    • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Jefsey_Morfin
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving, Frank Ellermann
      • Re: Facts, please, not handwaving, Jefsey_Morfin
    • RE: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Kyse Faril
• RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process, Noel Chiappa
  • RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process, Nelson, David
    • Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process, todd glassey
• RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process ratherthansome, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • Message not available
    • RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process ratherthansome, Joel M. Halpern
      • RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process, Yaakov Stein
      • Message not available
      • RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process, Jefsey_Morfin
  • RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process ratherthansome, Dave Cridland
  • Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process ratherthansome, Eliot Lear
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process ratherthansome, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • Message not available
      • RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process ratherthansome, Joel M. Halpern
  • RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process ratherthansome, Noel Chiappa
    • Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Processratherthansome, todd glassey
  • RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process ratherthansome, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: Crisis of Faith - was Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • Re: Crisis of Faith - was Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Fred Baker
  • Re: Crisis of Faith - was Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Brian E Carpenter
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Crisis of Faith - was Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, todd glassey
• IPv6 communication, thekkayil.joy
• Todd Glassey ban -- pretty please?, Pekka Savola
  • Re: Todd Glassey ban -- pretty please?, todd glassey
  • Re: Todd Glassey ban -- pretty please?, Sam Hartman
    • Re: Todd Glassey ban -- pretty please?, Brian E Carpenter
  • Re: Todd Glassey ban -- pretty please?, Jefsey_Morfin
    • Re: Todd Glassey ban -- pretty please?, Carl Malamud
      • Re: Todd Glassey ban -- pretty please?, Jefsey_Morfin
      • Re: Todd Glassey ban -- pretty please?, Theodore Tso
      • Please make the madness stop (was: a whole bunch of flames), Spencer Dawkins
      • Re: Please make the madness stop (was: a whole bunch of flames), todd glassey
      • Re: Please make the madness stop (was: a whole bunch of flames), Ted Faber
• Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some, Noel Chiappa
  • Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some, todd glassey
    • Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some, Rob Evans
      • Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some, todd glassey
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Fw: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some, todd glassey
    • Re: Fw: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some, Tim Chown
      • Re: Fw: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some, Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: Fw: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process ratherthan some, todd glassey
      • Re: Fw: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some, Jeffrey Hutzelman
• Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some, todd glassey
  • Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some, bmanning
    • Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some, todd glassey
      • Constant flux (was: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process [...]), Frank Ellermann
      • Re: Constant flux (was: Why cant the IETF embrace an open ElectionProcess [...]), todd glassey
      • Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some, bmanning
      • Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather thansome, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process ratherthansome, todd glassey
      • Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process ratherthansome, Randy Presuhn
• appeals, JFC Morfin
• RE: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Jeffrey Hutzelman
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Ned Freed
      • RE: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Jeffrey Hutzelman
  • RE: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Ned Freed
  • RE: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Last Call: 'Label Switching Router Self-Test' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-self-test) (2), Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)
  • Re: [mpls] Re: Last Call: 'Label Switching Router Self-Test' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-self-test) (2), George Swallow
• Re: Last Call: 'Label Switching Router Self-Test' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-self-test), Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)
• RFC Editor RFP Responses, rpelletier
  • Re: RFC Editor RFP Responses, Stephane Bortzmeyer
    • Re: RFC Editor RFP Responses, Marshall Eubanks
• Volunteer needed to serve as IANA charset reviewer, Ted Hardie
• Decision to Reset the NomCom Process, Andrew Lange
• RE: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations'to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, todd glassey
  • RE: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Jeffrey Hutzelman
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Ralph Droms
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Stewart Bryant
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Pekka Savola
• RE: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackof communicaiton here..., Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackof communicaiton here..., Sandy Wills
• Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Sam Hartman
  • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Jefsey_Morfin
  • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Robert Sayre
    • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Sam Hartman
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Jefsey_Morfin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Sam Hartman
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations'to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Robert Sayre
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Sam Hartman
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Robert Sayre
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Keith Moore
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Robert Sayre
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Keith Moore
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Robert Sayre
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Jefsey_Morfin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Jefsey_Morfin
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Sam Hartman
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Jefsey_Morfin
  • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Frank Ellermann
  • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Brian E Carpenter
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Keith Moore
      • Re: Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Robert Sayre
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Sam Hartman
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Robert Sayre
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Sam Hartman
      • Re: Last Call: 'Procedures for protocol extensions and variations' to BCP (draft-carpenter-protocol-extensions), Jefsey_Morfin
• RE: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackof communicaiton here..., Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackof communicaiton here..., Stewart Bryant
    • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackof communicaiton here..., todd glassey
      • RE: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lack of communication here..., Fleischman, Eric
      • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lack of communication here..., todd glassey
      • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackof communicaiton here..., Keith Moore
      • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackof communicaiton here..., todd glassey
      • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackof communicaiton here..., Theodore Tso
      • RE: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackofcommunicaiton here..., Richard Shockey
    • Adjusting the Nomcom process, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Keith Moore
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, John C Klensin
      • Message not available
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, John C Klensin
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Lakshminath Dondeti
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Jari Arkko
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Sam Hartman
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Stewart Bryant
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Lars Eggert
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Edward Lewis
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Brian E Carpenter
      • Crisis of Faith - was Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, todd glassey
      • Re: Crisis of Faith - was Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: Crisis of Faith - was Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Theodore Tso
      • Re: Crisis of Faith - was Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, todd glassey
      • Re: Crisis of Faith - was Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Carl Malamud
      • Message not available
      • Re: Crisis of Faith - was Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Theodore Tso
      • Re: Crisis of Faith - was Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, todd glassey
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, todd glassey
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, bmanning
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Ned Freed
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Eliot Lear
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Ned Freed
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Eliot Lear
      • RE: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Eastlake III Donald-LDE008
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, todd glassey
      • Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process, Lars Eggert
  • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackof communicaiton here..., Keith Moore
  • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackof communicaiton here..., Jari Arkko
    • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackof communicaiton here..., Lakshminath Dondeti
• RE: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackofcommunicaiton here..., Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lack of communicaiton here..., Brian E Carpenter
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackofcommunicaiton here..., Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to belackofcommunicaiton here..., Al Arsenault
• RE: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lack of communicaiton here..., Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lack of communicaiton here..., Noel Chiappa
    • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lackof communicaiton here..., todd glassey
• what happened to newtrk?, Eliot Lear
  • Re: what happened to newtrk?, todd glassey
    • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Keith Moore
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, todd glassey
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Keith Moore
  • Re: what happened to newtrk?, C. M. Heard
    • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Eliot Lear
  • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Frank Ellermann
    • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Brian E Carpenter
      • RE: what happened to newtrk?, Pasi.Eronen
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Brian E Carpenter
      • RFC 2195 (was Re: what happened to newtrk?), Alexey Melnikov
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Frank Ellermann
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, John C Klensin
      • RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Kurt D. Zeilenga
      • Re: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), John C Klensin
      • Re: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Jeffrey Hutzelman
      • Re: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Jeffrey Hutzelman
      • Re: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Frank Ellermann
      • Re: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Kurt D. Zeilenga
      • RE: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Christian Huitema
      • Re: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Frank Ellermann
      • Re: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Jeffrey Hutzelman
      • Re: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Frank Ellermann
      • RE: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Christian Huitema
      • Re: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Frank Ellermann
      • RE: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Christian Huitema
      • Re: RFC 2195 (Was: what happened to newtrk?), Frank Ellermann
      • Re: RFC 2195, Frank Ellermann
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Frank Ellermann
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Sam Hartman
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, John C Klensin
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, C. M. Heard
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, John C Klensin
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Frank Ellermann
  • Re: what happened to newtrk?, John C Klensin
    • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Eliot Lear
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Steven M. Bellovin
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Eliot Lear
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: what happened to newtrk?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: what happened to newtrk?, John C Klensin
      • RE: what happened to newtrk?, Jeffrey Hutzelman
      • Re: what happened to newtrk?, Brian E Carpenter
• RE: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lack ofcommunicaiton here..., Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lack ofcommunicaiton here..., todd glassey
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lack ofcommunicaiton here..., Noel Chiappa
  • Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lack ofcommunicaiton here..., Noel Chiappa
• Re: IESG response and questions to the normative reference experiment (draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt), Pekka Savola
  • Re: IESG response and questions to the normative reference experiment (draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt), Sam Hartman
    • Re: IESG response and questions to the normative reference experiment (draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt), Pekka Savola
      • Re: IESG response and questions to the normative reference experiment (draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt), Sam Hartman
      • Re: IESG response and questions to the normative reference experiment (draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt), Pekka Savola
  • Re: IESG response and questions to the normative reference experiment (draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt), todd glassey
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: IESG response and questions to the normative reference experiment (draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt), Jefsey_Morfin
  • Re: IESG response and questions to the normative reference experiment (draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt), Eliot Lear
• IETF Meetings 68 & 69, rpelletier
• Re: IESG response and questions to the normative reference experiment (draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt), Thomas Narten
  • Re: IESG response and questions to the normative reference experiment (draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt), Brian E Carpenter
• Re: IESG response and questions to the normative reference experiment (draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt), Frank Ellermann
• Re: IESG response and questions to the normative reference experiment (draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt), Jefsey_Morfin
• www.ietf.org unresponsive over IPv6?, Tim Chown
  • Re: www.ietf.org unresponsive over IPv6?, Jeroen Massar
    • Re: www.ietf.org unresponsive over IPv6?, Tim Chown
      • Re: www.ietf.org unresponsive over IPv6?, Jeroen Massar
      • Re: www.ietf.org unresponsive over IPv6?, Tim Chown
  • Re: www.ietf.org unresponsive over IPv6?, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
• Fixing the algorithm, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: Fixing the algorithm, Yaakov Stein
    • Re: Fixing the algorithm, todd glassey
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Fixing the algorithm, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: NomCom 2006/07: Selection Process Reset, John Leslie
  • Re: NomCom 2006/07: Selection Process Reset, Marshall Eubanks
    • Re: NomCom 2006/07: Selection Process Reset, Harald Alvestrand
      • RE: NomCom 2006/07: Selection Process Reset, Richard Shockey
    • Re: NomCom 2006/07: Selection Process Reset, Brian E Carpenter
• Last call comment on 'XML Pipelining with Chunks for the, Rick Jelliffe
  • Re: Last call comment on 'XML Pipelining with Chunks for the, Andrew Newton
  • Re: Now there seems to be lack of communicaiton here..., Leslie Daigle
• [no subject], Unknown
• [no subject], Unknown
• What is going on with the NOMCOM, Richard Shockey
• Now there seems to be lack of communicaiton here..., Richard Shockey
  • Re: Now there seems to be lack of communicaiton here..., Michael StJohns
    • Re: Now there seems to be lack of communicaiton here..., Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: Now there seems to be lack of communicaiton here..., todd glassey
  • Re: Now there seems to be lack of communicaiton here..., Brian E Carpenter
    • RE: Now there seems to be lack of communicaiton here..., Richard Shockey