(unknown)

This message was delayed due to mail server problems.
We regret any inconvience.

Received: from pmessage.accd.edu [10.12.0.208] by ACCDVM.ACCD.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R4a) via TCP with SMTP ; Mon, 19 Apr 2004 12:26:52 CST
Received: from above.proper.com (above.proper.com [208.184.76.39])
	by pmessage.accd.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3JGJTXq030017
	for <[email protected]>; Mon, 19 Apr 2004 11:19:30 -0500
	(envelope-from [email protected])
Received: from above.proper.com (localhost.vpnc.org [127.0.0.1])
	by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i3JH0iwn099388;
	Mon, 19 Apr 2004 10:00:44 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from [email protected])
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.9/Submit) id i3JH0iF8099387;
	Mon, 19 Apr 2004 10:00:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: above.proper.com: majordom set sender to [email protected] using -f
Received: from fed1rmmtao09.cox.net (fed1rmmtao09.cox.net [68.230.241.30])
	by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i3JH0gSj099377
	for <[email protected]>; Mon, 19 Apr 2004 10:00:43 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from [email protected])
Received: from NetVista ([68.227.176.107]) by fed1rmmtao09.cox.net
          (InterMail vM.6.01.03.02 201-2131-111-104-20040324) with ESMTP
          id <20040419170039.COZB14862.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@NetVista>;
          Mon, 19 Apr 2004 13:00:39 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
 <[email protected]>
 <[email protected]>
X-Mailer: Calypso Version 3.30.00.00 (4)
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 10:00:34 -0700
Reply-To: [email protected]
From: "David C. Thewlis" <[email protected]>
To: "Cyrus Daboo" <[email protected]>, "IETF CALSCH" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Scheduling the First Interop sponsored by The Calendaring
  and  Scheduling Consortium
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: [email protected]
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-calendar/mail-archive/>
List-ID: <ietf-calendar.imc.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?body=unsubscribe>
X-PMX-Version: 4.5.0.92886, Antispam-Core: 4.0.4.93542, Antispam-Data: 2004.4.18.97808


Cyrus,

A good point and one I hadn't thought of.  Or if we stuck to
Thursday/Friday and the host was anywhere on the West Coast (for example)
it would still be possible for people to easily get down to San Diego for
the IETF meeting, on an air ticket that spanned a Saturday night.  Unless
we actually had the event in San Diego and probably at the hotel I would
think we'd want to give people a day in between -- especially us, as we
have to take down the site and bundle ourselves up.

That would argue for EITHER waiting until the end of July, OR having the
first one asap and then the second one at the end of July.  By this
reasoning the early July date would be least useful.

Dave Thewlis


*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 4/19/2004 at 12:38 Cyrus Daboo wrote:

>Hi David,
>
>--On Sunday, April 18, 2004 05:24:12 PM -0700 "David C. Thewlis" 
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>| (c) 29-30 July.
>
>This is right before the IETF meeting in San Diego (1 - 6 August) so it 
>could be tied to that, in which case doing it 30/31 (Friday/Saturday)
>would 
>be better. Ideally having it at the IETF hotel would be good too. If the 
>calsch WG meeting could be scheduled early in the week that might
>encourage 
>a larger attendance from those at the interop who might stay over.
>
>-- 
>Cyrus Daboo