On 4/12/17 07:01, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
So, you mean they don’t use email?
Sounds surprising to me, despite for sure they had some time in Chicago to
decide about what can be said to the community about the SF meeting. If they
haven’t considered that, I guess we need an IAOC with more focus on what is
the most relevant and important topic right now for the community.
By the way, it seems that they haven’t met anyway since August 2015, as they
promised me to respond to one of my emails regarding some spam/email bouncing
issues and the way we are managing so, and I’ve been waiting since them.
Really nice and respectful way to support the community.
As a mailing list moderator who sees a fair amount of bounces, It is
notable that you mta routinly bounces messages to various lists for
reasons that from from the header appear to be disliking the sender. How
you run your MTAm since it is yours, is obviously up to you.
De: ietf <ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> en nombre de Ted Lemon
Responder a: <mellon(_at_)fugue(_dot_)com>
Fecha: miércoles, 12 de abril de 2017, 15:26
CC: <iaoc(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>, IETF Discussion <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Asunto: Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities
On Apr 12, 2017, at 4:53 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Do we need to ask again and again every day?
Has the IAOC met since the first time you asked?
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.
Description: OpenPGP digital signature