I've never read RFC 3005, but my take is that in this specific advertisement is very meaningful for both IPv6 and V6ops mailing lists, so I wouldn't see where there would be a problem this time.
But on a general basis, I've seen too many postings which were really not appropriate to be sent on to the mailing lists where there were sent to. So, I guess it's a matter of self-restrain. Thierry. On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 01:55:43 +0900 JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 01:51:00 +0900, >>>>>> JINMEI Tatuya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > >> (excuse me cross posting - hopefully it's not so noisy) > >I was reminded that (this type of) conference information was >inappropriate for IETF lists according to the general rule described >in RFC3005. Of course, I didn't intend to abuse the lists, but >clearly I should have checked the policy more carefully before posting >it. I'd apologize if any of you felt uncomfortable about the >unsolicited message. I won't (ab)use IETF lists about subsequent >information (if any) on this matter. > > JINMEI, Tatuya > Communication Platform Lab. > Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
