Jim Fenton wrote:
Dave Crocker wrote:
So effectively the issue has changed from whether 30 days notice
really is required to whether what is really only 3 is somehow
acceptable. (RFC2418, Section 3.1
I penciled in the meetings when they were originally proposed, not sure
why this is a surprise to people.
Because there was no follow-through to confirm the dates, after the first date
was questioned and because nothing happened for the first two dates.
January 3 and 10 got cancelled for
various reasons (proximity to the holidays and lack of 30-day notice, I
think) but the rest are still there.
They got canceled? Oh.
When did that happen? Pointer to the archive, please.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html