Re: Above market hotel room rates

[Donald Eastlake]

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:36 PM, Lou Berger  wrote:

> I asked Ray about this problem in Hiroshima, his response was something
> along the lines of "conference rates are different and more complicated
> from regular hotel rates".  I have to say, I really think the community
> deserves a detailed response on this topic from the secretariat...
>
> Lou


I don't know why you would expect a different answer from the answer that
has previously been provided. Its complicated and each meeting is a little
different but in general, the lower the room rates the higher the
registration fee. If, in effect, registration fees are being subsidized by
room rates and enough people evade the room rates one way or another, the
registration fees have to go up. For an interesting and unusual example,
here is some registration information for the March 2010 IEEE 802 Plenary
meeting, which I attended in Orlando, Florida, last week:
http://ieee802.facetoface-events.com/files/sessions/63/update2.pdf
You will note (see red text at near the bottom of the page) that, if you
didn't stay in one of the two official meeting hotels, you had to pay an
extra $300 registration fee.

Thanks,
Donald



> On 3/23/2010 6:44 PM, Samuel Weiler wrote:
> > Once again, we appear to be meeting in a hotel that's offering lower
> rates to
> > the general public than they're offering to us.
> >
> > As of right now, the "Best Available Rate" at the Anaheim Hilton for
> tonight,
> > 23 March 2010, is $119.  The senior rate is $113.  That's from
> hilton.com.
> > With a 2 day cancellation policy.
> >
> > The same rate is also available for a three night stay, leaving on
> Friday.
> >
> > -- Sam
>
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

RE: Make the Internet uncensorable to intermediate nodes

[Greg Daley]

Hi Mark, 
 
You are incorrect.  I am not referring to IPSec, VPNs or Secure Shell.
I am not even referring to TOR (I don't put the solution before the problem).

I am referring to the goal:
1) Unsnoopable
2) Untraceable

The set {IPSec, VPNs, SecSH} meet only the first of these.

There is a functional difference between IETF continuing to work on 
protocols associated with 1), which there is a commercial need for today, 
and embarking upon standardizing protocols which address 1) and 2),
for which the purpose is political.

I am not opposed to this work.

Does it have to be standardized, and does it have to be IETF?

With regard to affronting hosts, I would think that anyone who visited
a home or a country would behave politely.

I am always polite and respectful of people in the USA when I visit, and
understand it is a privilege (as a non-Citizen) to be there.  

My message alluded to the fact that there are different patterns of 
politeness in many East Asian countries.   One of the issues is that
politicising IETF work would put our peers in China in an untenable 
position with regard to the authorities.  

These are the people we are going to China to engage with and encourage.

The people you may be angry with are not these people.

Please take the political activism somewhere else, where it will be more
effective. 

Sincerely,

Greg Daley





From: Mark Atwood [mailto:m...@pobox.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2010 2:16 PM
To: Greg Daley
Cc: MtFBwU; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Make the Internet uncensorable to intermediate nodes


On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 11:24 PM, Greg Daley 
 wrote:



I would actually not encourage IETF to work on such a 
technology as this,
particularly in the lead-up to IETF Beijing.  That would be a 
serious affront
to our hosts.


By "as this", you are referring to both technologies such as "Tor", and 
also similarly useful technologies as IPsec, VPNs, and Secure Shell, all of 
which are useful and are used today to "Make the Internet uncensorable to 
intermediate nodes".

The Chinese government seem to be excessively affrontable, and entirely 
too many westerners are enablers of this.  It's insulting, by western 
standards.  If "the west" has to worry about insulting "China", then "China" 
can get a clue about being insulting to "the west". The Chinese government can 
grow a thicker skin.

..m


___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Make the Internet uncensorable to intermediate nodes

[Mark Atwood]

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 11:24 PM, Greg Daley wrote:

>
> I would actually not encourage IETF to work on such a technology as this,
> particularly in the lead-up to IETF Beijing.  That would be a serious
> affront
> to our hosts.


By "as this", you are referring to both technologies such as "Tor", and also
similarly useful technologies as IPsec, VPNs, and Secure Shell, all of which
are useful and are used today to "Make the Internet uncensorable to
intermediate nodes".

The Chinese government seem to be excessively affrontable, and entirely too
many westerners are enablers of this.  It's insulting, by western standards.
 If "the west" has to worry about insulting "China", then "China" can get a
clue about being insulting to "the west". The Chinese government can grow a
thicker skin.

..m
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Above market hotel room rates

[Lou Berger]

I asked Ray about this problem in Hiroshima, his response was something
along the lines of "conference rates are different and more complicated
from regular hotel rates".  I have to say, I really think the community
deserves a detailed response on this topic from the secretariat...

Lou

On 3/23/2010 6:44 PM, Samuel Weiler wrote:
> Once again, we appear to be meeting in a hotel that's offering lower rates to 
> the general public than they're offering to us.
> 
> As of right now, the "Best Available Rate" at the Anaheim Hilton for tonight, 
> 23 March 2010, is $119.  The senior rate is $113.  That's from hilton.com. 
> With a 2 day cancellation policy.
> 
> The same rate is also available for a three night stay, leaving on Friday.
> 
> -- Sam
> ___
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 
> 
> 
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Above market hotel room rates

[Samuel Weiler]

Once again, we appear to be meeting in a hotel that's offering lower rates to 
the general public than they're offering to us.


As of right now, the "Best Available Rate" at the Anaheim Hilton for tonight, 
23 March 2010, is $119.  The senior rate is $113.  That's from hilton.com. 
With a 2 day cancellation policy.


The same rate is also available for a three night stay, leaving on Friday.

-- Sam
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Javascript timer for speakers

[Lars Eggert]

Here is mine. It's a hacked up (= simplified) version of some code that was 
apparently originally done by Rob Austein (I got it form someone else at some 
point).

This reminds me that I still owe Rob the beer-ware beer...

Title: Discussion Timer

















TimeRemaining 
0:00








On 2010-3-23, at 23:41, Theodore Ts'o wrote:

> 
> A while back, someone shared (I think on the IETF list) a little quick
> javascript hack that when loaded into the browser, would display a
> countdown timer of the remaining amount of time that the speaker had to
> speak, and and when the speaker started to go over, the mm:ss numbers
> started counting up in Red.
> 
> Such a hack would come in really handy for me --- if anyone has such a
> beast, I'd really appreciate it if they could send it my way.  (I think
> it was used fairly allocate time between speakers at the IESG public
> plenary meeting way back when)
> 
> Many thanks!!
> 
>   - Ted
> ___
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Javascript timer for speakers

[Dave Aronson]

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 18:41, Theodore Ts'o  wrote:

> A while back, someone shared (I think on the IETF list) a little quick
> javascript hack that when loaded into the browser, would display a
> countdown timer of the remaining amount of time that the speaker had to
> speak, and and when the speaker started to go over, the mm:ss numbers
> started counting up in Red.

Mine is a bit different, but still useful.  Check it out at:

  http://fairfax.freetoasthost.org/files/timer.html

Details:  Enter a minimum and maximum.  Press Start.  It counts up,
showing the time, with a blue background in the browser.  When the
minimum is reached, it turns green.  Halfway from there to maximum, it
turns yellow.  At maximum it turns red.  There are additional
features, mainly intended for use in Toastmasters.  Very lightweight,
simple Javascript, should work fine on laptops at a distance or mobile
devices up close.

-Dave

-- 
Dave Aronson - Have Pun, Will Babble | Work: davearonson.com | /\ ASCII
-+ Play: davearonson.net | \/ Ribbon
"Specialization is for insects." | Life: dare2xl.com | /\ Campaign
-Robert A. Heinlein  | Wife: nasjleti.net| Email<>Web
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Make the Internet uncensorable to intermediate nodes

[todd glassey]

On 3/23/2010 2:39 PM, Dean Willis wrote:
> Greg Daley wrote:
> 
>> I would actually not encourage IETF to work on such a technology as this,
>> particularly in the lead-up to IETF Beijing.  That would be a serious affront
>> to our hosts.  It is quite important to ensure that the IETF particularly is 
>> not
>> subject to any external party's agenda in the lead-up to the meeting.
> 
> How about being subject to an internal agenda, like making the Internet
> available to people who are suffering under repressive regimes?
> 
> Obligatoy protest: And given the Google debacle, why are we still going
> to Beijing?

Because the IETF is about creating Intellectual Properties regarding
networksing. Not a Political Action Committee...

Todd
> 
> --
> Dean
> ___
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 

<>___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Javascript timer for speakers

[Henning Schulzrinne]

http://edas.info/timer.php is a basic one. (EDAS is a site I run.)

Henning

On Mar 23, 2010, at 6:41 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:

> 
> A while back, someone shared (I think on the IETF list) a little quick
> javascript hack that when loaded into the browser, would display a
> countdown timer of the remaining amount of time that the speaker had to
> speak, and and when the speaker started to go over, the mm:ss numbers
> started counting up in Red.
> 
> Such a hack would come in really handy for me --- if anyone has such a
> beast, I'd really appreciate it if they could send it my way.  (I think
> it was used fairly allocate time between speakers at the IESG public
> plenary meeting way back when)
> 
> Many thanks!!
> 
>   - Ted
> ___
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Javascript timer for speakers

[Theodore Ts'o]

A while back, someone shared (I think on the IETF list) a little quick
javascript hack that when loaded into the browser, would display a
countdown timer of the remaining amount of time that the speaker had to
speak, and and when the speaker started to go over, the mm:ss numbers
started counting up in Red.

Such a hack would come in really handy for me --- if anyone has such a
beast, I'd really appreciate it if they could send it my way.  (I think
it was used fairly allocate time between speakers at the IESG public
plenary meeting way back when)

Many thanks!!

- Ted
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Make the Internet uncensorable to intermediate nodes

[Dean Willis]

Greg Daley wrote:

> I would actually not encourage IETF to work on such a technology as this,
> particularly in the lead-up to IETF Beijing.  That would be a serious affront
> to our hosts.  It is quite important to ensure that the IETF particularly is 
> not
> subject to any external party's agenda in the lead-up to the meeting.

How about being subject to an internal agenda, like making the Internet
available to people who are suffering under repressive regimes?

Obligatoy protest: And given the Google debacle, why are we still going
to Beijing?

--
Dean
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77

[Tony Hansen]

+5

Tony Hansen

On 3/23/2010 5:17 PM, Spencer Dawkins wrote:

Fred, thanks for this news.


By the way, I'm told that T-shirts have been ordered. We should have
the opportunity to purchase them somewhere around here tomorrow or the
next day.

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77

[Spencer Dawkins]

Fred, thanks for this news.


By the way, I'm told that T-shirts have been ordered. We should have the 
opportunity to purchase them somewhere around here tomorrow or the next 
day.


Spencer 


___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77

[Fred Baker]

By the way, I'm told that T-shirts have been ordered. We should have the 
opportunity to purchase them somewhere around here tomorrow or the next day.
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77

[Yoav Nir]

Agree. This was just in response to the "IETF is bought" message.

This disclosure in important for identifying bias, I think.

On Mar 23, 2010, at 11:03 AM, todd glassey wrote:

> On 3/23/2010 10:20 AM, Donald Eastlake wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Yoav Nir  wrote:
>> 
>>> The corporate name on my nametag is there only because I filled that field
>>> in the registration form. Others haven't and don't have a corporation name.
> 
> When a corporation sends a representative to the IETF and their business
> is network or network impacted anything then that party is deriving
> benefit from the participation of that representative.
> 
> So in the interest of disclosure ALL of the members of the IETF have the
> right to know who is paying for everyone elses participation. Work for
> Hire law makes their actions 'on behalf of the sponsor' no matter what
> pretty much and as such there is a legal and ethical responsibility to
> disclose that information fully IMHO.
> 
> 
> Todd
> 
>>> 
>>> Besides, the corporation name is there not because Check Point has "bought"
>>> the IETF, but so that if I say that everyone should use a firewall, people
>>> will take that with the appropriate grain of salt.
> 
> 
>>> 
>> 
>> Affiliations are normally listed on IETF documents and badges for the
>> purpose of assisting in identifying the person so affiliated.
>> 
>> Donald
>> 
>> 
>>> Anyway, if we're raising money for the IETF, someone should have made IETF
>>> 77 T-shirts for sale. They last longer than green dots, and give you
>>> bragging rights.
>>> 
>>> On Mar 22, 2010, at 8:12 PM, DOLLY, MARTIN C (ATTLABS) wrote:
>>> 
 Guess you are not that street smart, look at the corporation names on
 the name tags... IETF is bought
 
 -Original Message-
 From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
 Dave CROCKER
 Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 9:19 PM
 To: Thomson, Martin
 Cc: IETF Discussion
 Subject: Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77
 
 
 
 On 3/22/2010 5:59 PM, Thomson, Martin wrote:
> "This working group brought to you by"
> 
> Just after note well.
 
 
 Right, but some working groups will have multiple offers for
 sponsorship.
 
 Should there be a premium charge for the more popular working groups?
 
 There also might be some spoofing, where someone pays to have /you/
 listed as
 sponsor of the wg.  That leads to the possibility of your paying for a
 de-listing...
 
 d/
 --
 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Ietf mailing list
>> Ietf@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 
> ___
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77

[todd glassey]

On 3/23/2010 10:20 AM, Donald Eastlake wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Yoav Nir  wrote:
> 
>> The corporate name on my nametag is there only because I filled that field
>> in the registration form. Others haven't and don't have a corporation name.

When a corporation sends a representative to the IETF and their business
is network or network impacted anything then that party is deriving
benefit from the participation of that representative.

So in the interest of disclosure ALL of the members of the IETF have the
right to know who is paying for everyone elses participation. Work for
Hire law makes their actions 'on behalf of the sponsor' no matter what
pretty much and as such there is a legal and ethical responsibility to
disclose that information fully IMHO.


Todd

>>
>> Besides, the corporation name is there not because Check Point has "bought"
>> the IETF, but so that if I say that everyone should use a firewall, people
>> will take that with the appropriate grain of salt.


>>
> 
> Affiliations are normally listed on IETF documents and badges for the
> purpose of assisting in identifying the person so affiliated.
> 
> Donald
> 
> 
>> Anyway, if we're raising money for the IETF, someone should have made IETF
>> 77 T-shirts for sale. They last longer than green dots, and give you
>> bragging rights.
>>
>> On Mar 22, 2010, at 8:12 PM, DOLLY, MARTIN C (ATTLABS) wrote:
>>
>>> Guess you are not that street smart, look at the corporation names on
>>> the name tags... IETF is bought
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>>> Dave CROCKER
>>> Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 9:19 PM
>>> To: Thomson, Martin
>>> Cc: IETF Discussion
>>> Subject: Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/22/2010 5:59 PM, Thomson, Martin wrote:
 "This working group brought to you by"

 Just after note well.
>>>
>>>
>>> Right, but some working groups will have multiple offers for
>>> sponsorship.
>>>
>>> Should there be a premium charge for the more popular working groups?
>>>
>>> There also might be some spoofing, where someone pays to have /you/
>>> listed as
>>> sponsor of the wg.  That leads to the possibility of your paying for a
>>> de-listing...
>>>
>>> d/
>>> --
>>>
>>>   Dave Crocker
>>>   Brandenburg InternetWorking
>>>   bbiw.net
>>
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<>___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Audio Streaming Update 3/21 - IETF 77 March 21-26, 2010

[Michael Richardson]

> "Joel" == Joel Jaeggli  writes:
>> Can you tell us where each piece went?  It did include an audio
>> bridge... i.e. Paul's laptop was emitting audio and the room mic
>> was picking it up, right?

Joel> When I left the room the sip ata in the room was dialed into a
Joel> webex conference call, the digital innkeeper was connected to
Joel> the sip ata and both a line input (from caller) and mix out
Joel> (to caller) on the mixer at the front of the room. paul's mac
Joel> was running the webex session. The windows box was being used
Joel> to present.

I see, so the slides were being pushed through webex to the screen.
The audio however was being spliced right into room PA and into the mp3
encoder?  So no ATM bridge was involved?

How come we could hear the echo of his voice in the room then...

-- 
]   He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life!   |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON|net architect[
] m...@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
   Kyoto Plus: watch the video 
   then sign the petition. 

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77

[Donald Eastlake]

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Yoav Nir  wrote:

> The corporate name on my nametag is there only because I filled that field
> in the registration form. Others haven't and don't have a corporation name.
>
> Besides, the corporation name is there not because Check Point has "bought"
> the IETF, but so that if I say that everyone should use a firewall, people
> will take that with the appropriate grain of salt.
>

Affiliations are normally listed on IETF documents and badges for the
purpose of assisting in identifying the person so affiliated.

Donald


> Anyway, if we're raising money for the IETF, someone should have made IETF
> 77 T-shirts for sale. They last longer than green dots, and give you
> bragging rights.
>
> On Mar 22, 2010, at 8:12 PM, DOLLY, MARTIN C (ATTLABS) wrote:
>
> > Guess you are not that street smart, look at the corporation names on
> > the name tags... IETF is bought
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> > Dave CROCKER
> > Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 9:19 PM
> > To: Thomson, Martin
> > Cc: IETF Discussion
> > Subject: Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77
> >
> >
> >
> > On 3/22/2010 5:59 PM, Thomson, Martin wrote:
> >> "This working group brought to you by"
> >>
> >> Just after note well.
> >
> >
> > Right, but some working groups will have multiple offers for
> > sponsorship.
> >
> > Should there be a premium charge for the more popular working groups?
> >
> > There also might be some spoofing, where someone pays to have /you/
> > listed as
> > sponsor of the wg.  That leads to the possibility of your paying for a
> > de-listing...
> >
> > d/
> > --
> >
> >   Dave Crocker
> >   Brandenburg InternetWorking
> >   bbiw.net
>
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Bar BoF on Location Coherence Wednesday at 11:30 AM

[Richard Barnes]

This meeting will be held at 11:45 today in the Carmel room.  Sorry  
for the late notice.

--Richard


On Mar 17, 2010, at 4:11 PM, Richard Barnes wrote:


Hey all,

This message is announcing a bar BoF ("lunch BoF") on Location  
Coherence -- interoperability between different location protocols  
and APIs -- for the lunch break on Wednesday of the IETF week.   
Location is still TBD (ironically).


Full announcement here: 

Mailing list here: 

Thanks,
--Richard
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77

[Yoav Nir]

The corporate name on my nametag is there only because I filled that field in 
the registration form. Others haven't and don't have a corporation name.

Besides, the corporation name is there not because Check Point has "bought" the 
IETF, but so that if I say that everyone should use a firewall, people will 
take that with the appropriate grain of salt.

Anyway, if we're raising money for the IETF, someone should have made IETF 77 
T-shirts for sale. They last longer than green dots, and give you bragging 
rights.

On Mar 22, 2010, at 8:12 PM, DOLLY, MARTIN C (ATTLABS) wrote:

> Guess you are not that street smart, look at the corporation names on
> the name tags... IETF is bought
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Dave CROCKER
> Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 9:19 PM
> To: Thomson, Martin
> Cc: IETF Discussion
> Subject: Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77
> 
> 
> 
> On 3/22/2010 5:59 PM, Thomson, Martin wrote:
>> "This working group brought to you by"
>> 
>> Just after note well.
> 
> 
> Right, but some working groups will have multiple offers for
> sponsorship.
> 
> Should there be a premium charge for the more popular working groups?
> 
> There also might be some spoofing, where someone pays to have /you/
> listed as 
> sponsor of the wg.  That leads to the possibility of your paying for a
> de-listing...
> 
> d/
> -- 
> 
>   Dave Crocker
>   Brandenburg InternetWorking
>   bbiw.net
> ___
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> ___
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 
> Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Audio Streaming Update 3/21 - IETF 77 March 21-26, 2010

[Joel Jaeggli]

On 03/23/2010 09:05 AM, Michael Richardson wrote:
>> "Joel" == Joel Jaeggli  writes:
> >> I am a remote participant for, I think, the 4th time running.
> >> 
> >> Things work really well, although it would be nice to have an
> >> official, digital only way to bridge in a remote *presenter*.
> >> Yaron Sheffer has been bridged via teamspeak(or was it skype?) 
> >> plus "audio bridge" into ipsecme, and it works okay, but not
> >> great.
> 
> Joel> Yaron was bridged using a jk audio digital inkeeper, a
> Joel> grandstream sip ata, gizmoproject, the pstn and Webex.
> 
> Can you tell us where each piece went?
> It did include an audio bridge... i.e. Paul's laptop was emitting audio
> and the room mic was picking it up, right?

When I left the room the sip ata in the room was dialed into a webex
conference call, the digital innkeeper was connected to the sip ata and
both a line input (from caller) and mix out (to caller) on the mixer at
the front of the room. paul's mac was running the webex session. The
windows box was being used to present.

Whatever happened after I left is outside my knowledge.

joel

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Audio Streaming Update 3/21 - IETF 77 March 21-26, 2010

[Michael Richardson]

> "Joel" == Joel Jaeggli  writes:
>> I am a remote participant for, I think, the 4th time running.
>> 
>> Things work really well, although it would be nice to have an
>> official, digital only way to bridge in a remote *presenter*.
>> Yaron Sheffer has been bridged via teamspeak(or was it skype?) 
>> plus "audio bridge" into ipsecme, and it works okay, but not
>> great.

Joel> Yaron was bridged using a jk audio digital inkeeper, a
Joel> grandstream sip ata, gizmoproject, the pstn and Webex.

Can you tell us where each piece went?
It did include an audio bridge... i.e. Paul's laptop was emitting audio
and the room mic was picking it up, right?

-- 
]   He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life!   |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON|net architect[
] m...@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
   Kyoto Plus: watch the video 
   then sign the petition. 
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

RE: [77all] No Host for IETF 77

[DOLLY, MARTIN C (ATTLABS)]

Guess you are not that street smart, look at the corporation names on
the name tags... IETF is bought

-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Dave CROCKER
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 9:19 PM
To: Thomson, Martin
Cc: IETF Discussion
Subject: Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77



On 3/22/2010 5:59 PM, Thomson, Martin wrote:
> "This working group brought to you by"
>
> Just after note well.


Right, but some working groups will have multiple offers for
sponsorship.

Should there be a premium charge for the more popular working groups?

There also might be some spoofing, where someone pays to have /you/
listed as 
sponsor of the wg.  That leads to the possibility of your paying for a
de-listing...

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: [NSIS] Last Call: draft-ietf-nsis-rmd (RMD-QOSM - The Resource Management in Diffserv QOS Model) to Experimental RFC

[Georgios Karagiannis]

Hi Jerry


In my opinion the required bit example format is already
specified in Section 4.1.
I do not think that it is usefull to duplicate the information that
is already givel elsewhere and copy it into this section.

Regarding the bit level format example, what we are willing to do
is to inlcude the following text in the Appendix A.6, instead of copying
figures from elsewhere.


"The bit level format of the RMD-QSpec is given in Section 4.1. In
particular, The Initiator/Local QSPEC bit, i.e.,  is set to "Local"
(i.e.,
   "1") and the  is set as follows:
   * Message Sequence = 0: Sender initiated
   * Object combination = 0:  for RESERVE and
  for RESPONSE

 The  used by RMD-QOSM is the default version, i.e.,
 "0", see [QSP-T]. The  value used by the RMD-QOSM is
 specified in [QSP-T] and is equal to: "2".
 The  contains the following fields:

  =  


 The Per Hop Reservation container (PHR container) and
 the Per Domain Reservation container (PDR container) are specified
 in Section 4.1.2 and 4.1.3, respectively. The 
 contains the traffic handling directives for intra-domain
 communication and reservation.  The  contains
 additional traffic handling directives that is needed for
 edge-to-edge communication. The RMD-QOSM  and
, are specified in  Section 4.1.1.
In RMD-QOSM the  and  objects contain the
following parameters:

  =   
  =   

 The bit format of the  (see [QSP-T] and Figure 4 and
 Figure 5) and  complies to the bit format
 specified in [QSP-T].

 Note that for this example the RMD reservation is established without an
  parameter, which is equivalent to a reservation
 established with an  whose value is 1."


Best regards,
Georgios

On 3/22/2010, "Gerald Ash"  wrote:

>Georgios,
> 
>I think it would be good to also include a bit-level example of the RMD-QSPEC, 
>such as given in Section 4.5 of the Y.1541-QOSM draft 
>(http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-nsis-y1541-qosm-10#section-4.5).  For 
>one thing, the QSPEC specification requires "at least one bit-level QSPEC 
>example" be given for all QOSM specifications (see Section 3.1 in 
>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-24#section-3.1).  
>Furthermore, an RMD-QSPEC example would add clarity to the RMD-QOSM 
>specification and not be very difficult to include IMO.
> 
>Thanks,
>Jerry
>
>
>
>  )
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: [NSIS] Last Call: draft-ietf-nsis-rmd (RMD-QOSM - The Resource Management in Diffserv QOS Model) to Experimental RFC

[Gerald Ash]

Hi Georgios,
 
RE:

>> 2. It would further clarify if you put in the bit-level example of the 
>> RMD-QSPEC, 
>> as called for by QOSM requirements given in the QSPEC draft.  E.g., such a 
>> bit-level QSPEC example is given in Section 4.5 ("Bit-Level QSPEC Example") 
>> of the Y.1541-QOSM draft
>> (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-nsis-y1541-qosm-10#section-4.5).  
>> This would clarify, for example, the QSPEC Procedure being used and other
>> bit-level details.

> Georgios: but this is already specified in Section 4.1. We could include
> a sentence in the appendix: "The bit level format of the RMD-QSPEC is
> specified in Section 4.1."
 
I don't see a full bit-level RMD-QSPEC example in Section 4.1  For one thing, 
the QSPEC header isn't given.  IMO it would be better to include a full 
bit-level example, including headers, etc., somewhere in Appendix A.
 
Thanks,
Jerry


  ___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Audio Streaming Update 3/21 - IETF 77 March 21-26, 2010

[Joel Jaeggli]

On 03/23/2010 06:59 AM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> I am a remote participant for, I think, the 4th time running.
> 
> Things work really well, although it would be nice to have an official,
> digital only way to bridge in a remote *presenter*.  Yaron Sheffer has
> been bridged via teamspeak(or was it skype?) plus "audio bridge" into
> ipsecme, and it works okay, but not great.

Yaron was bridged using a jk audio digital inkeeper, a grandstream sip
ata, gizmoproject, the pstn and Webex.

It would probably work a lot better if, the room were a bit smaller and
we eliminated the 8 bit 8khz portion of the pstn.

> The thing I want to alert people about is that:
> 
> the microphones are on between sessions

The equipement runs between meetings, in fact it runs all night as well.
This has been noted by me twice a meeting at least since 2004.

> BE MINDFUL what you say near the WG chair's table.
> or maybe WG chairs could turn that mike off when they leave.

Which just creates more opportunities troubleshoot later. The wireless
mics are bad enough.
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Audio Streaming Update 3/21 - IETF 77 March 21-26, 2010

[Joel Jaeggli]

Yeah that's what the streamer is in California C.

On 03/23/2010 03:22 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
> Dear Joel;
> 
> Will the plenaries be streamed as "California C" ?
> 
> Regards
> Marshall
> 
> On Mar 21, 2010, at 11:57 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> 
>> Greetings,
>>
>> The following is an update on the state of the audio streaming for
>> Sunday march 21.
>>
>> The following two sessions will be streamed on Channel-7 (Palos Verdes)
>>
>> 1000-1200  IEPG Meeting - Palos Verdes
>> 1300-1450  Newcomer's Training - Palos Verdes
>>
>> http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf777.m3u
>>
>> Standard information follows.
>>
>> -Audio Streaming-
>>
>> All 8 parallel tracks at the IETF 77 meeting will be broadcast starting
>> with the commencement of working group sessions on Monday, March 22,
>> 2010 at 0900 PDT (UTC-7) and continue until Friday the 26th at 1515
>> PDT. Additionally it is our intention to broadcast the IEPG meeting
>> occurring on Sunday the 21st starting at 1000 PDT.
>>
>> Because I have been asked several times in the past, note that if you
>> wish to use the rooms that are being recorded for impromptu meeting
>> during unscheduled sessions or lunch breaks that you can invite remote
>> participants to tune in to the appropriate stream. Recording cannot be
>> guaranteed for unscheduled sessions. Conversely, it should never be
>> assumed that recording or observation is not occurring on open
>> microphones, they are after all connected to the Internet.
>>
>> The links for streaming sources and the schedule are best retrieved from
>> the IETF tools agenda, located here:
>>
>> http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/77/
>>
>> A page in the legacy style with links to the archives will also be
>> available here (it is not presently):
>>
>> http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/
>>
>> The links and associated playlist channel bindings (in place during the
>> meeting) are as follows:
>>
>> California A ch1 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf771.m3u
>> California B ch2 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf772.m3u
>> California C ch3 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf773.m3u
>> California Dch4 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf774.m3u
>> Huntingotonch5 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf775.m3u
>> Manhattan ch6 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf776.m3u
>> Palos Verdesch7 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf777.m3u
>> Redondoch8 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf778.m3u
>>
>> and
>>
>> Allch* http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf77.m3u
>>
>> Regards
>> Joel Jaeggli
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Ietf mailing list
>> Ietf@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>>
> 
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Using xml2rfc (was: Re: Why the normative form of IETF Standards is ASCII)

[Fred Baker]

On Mar 23, 2010, at 6:12 AM, Doug Ewell wrote:

> Martin Rex  wrote:
> 
>> If anything deserves the description "60's style document editing" then it 
>> is the current xml2rfc processing, which requires a whole bunch of extra 
>> software, lots of manual processing steps, reading of lots of documentation 
>> and plenty of time and desire for humiliation in order to test all those 
>> features through the manual self-torture process.
> 
> I'm probably not a good data point, since I've only contributed to two RFCs, 
> and as a software developer I don't have much problem with using multiple 
> tools to get the job done (or with writing XML).  But I have to take issue 
> with the "humiliation and torture" scenario described by Martin.

I have been staying out of this, as one of those pointless debates that happen. 
But here I will chime in.

I do indeed use xml2rfc, and yes I installed an editor that I found helpful. It 
happens to be XMLMind with Bill Fenner's WYSIKN plugins. I do in fact keep a 
directory of current work, and I do in fact run xml2rfc on my system. It does 
all mostly work. The one thing that really makes it a little harder to use 
than, say, Word or Pages, is that I draw ASCII Art in one of a couple of other 
applications and have to drop it into the documents in a separate tool. It's 
not too hard.


http://www.ipinc.net/IPv4.GIF

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Audio Streaming Update 3/21 - IETF 77 March 21-26, 2010

[Michael Richardson]

I am a remote participant for, I think, the 4th time running.

Things work really well, although it would be nice to have an official,
digital only way to bridge in a remote *presenter*.  Yaron Sheffer has
been bridged via teamspeak(or was it skype?) plus "audio bridge" into
ipsecme, and it works okay, but not great.

The thing I want to alert people about is that:

the microphones are on between sessions

BE MINDFUL what you say near the WG chair's table.
or maybe WG chairs could turn that mike off when they leave.

-- 
]   He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life!   |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON|net architect[
] m...@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
   Kyoto Plus: watch the video 
   then sign the petition. 

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Why the normative form of IETF Standards is ASCII

[Doug Ewell]

Masataka Ohta  
wrote:


As many Japanese type Yen sign, when he actually want to input back 
slash, the JIS character of Yen sign is converted to unicode 
character of Yen sign, which is not back slash, which was the 
intention.


I think this means that the user's kludge, in typing a yen sign to 
get a backslash, is not matched by Unicode with an equal and opposite 
kludge of converting the yen sign back to a backslash.  I guess in 
the 1960s one could consider this a fault.


That is simply a reality though it does not match your opinion.


What opinion?  That it's not a fault that Unicode assigns only one 
character to each code point?


It should also be noted that, in Japanese encoding of JIS C 6226, back 
slash and Yen sign has been separateds already in 1978, which means 
unicode adds nothing.


If that if the case, why do users continue to enter one character and 
expect it to be converted to another?


Why don't we ask one of the scores of software vendors that have 
deployed Unicode, at least as "fully" as this thread is about, just 
how "disastrous" their experience has been and how much better things 
would be if they had stuck with ISO 2022 instead?


See above.


See WHAT above?  I have quoted the entire text to which you responded. 
Neither you nor I wrote anything "above" about whether vendors have had 
a "disastrous" experience with Unicode that would have been better with 
ISO 2022.  I appreciate your penchant for brevity, but this made no 
sense.


Many Kanji characters in JIS are displayed with Japanese font while 
many other Kanji characters not in JIS are some Chinese font, 
because of lack of information of unicode, which has been obvious 
long before I wrote 1815.


Is it your opinion that inadequate font coverage is the fault of the 
character encoding?


It's an explanation on the reality visible to us Japanese.


Inadequate font coverage is not the fault of the character encoding.

As a side note, if the complaint is that "Kanji characters not in JIS" 
are displayed in the wrong font, then how does it help to use 
ISO-2022-JP, where those characters cannot be represented at all, or 
full ISO 2022, in which the switch to another national character set 
would trigger a font change anyway?



I do find this difficult to understand.


It merely means that you don't have enough expertise to discuss 
Japanese and Chinese characters.


That's fine, as long as you don't discuss Japanese and Chinese 
characters.


Again, the argument is that if I disagree with you, it must be due to my 
ignorance.


But I will point out that I didn't start this discussion from the 
standpoint of Japanese vs. Chinese, and I have not attempted to rely on 
my own knowledge of Japanese or Chinese, but instead have relied on the 
experts within (and contributing to) UTC and WG2 who have said 
repeatedly that the basic identity of a Han/Kanji/Hanja character is 
independent of language, and that the end user's choice of fonts is 
paramount for correct styling.


A charset description should be understandable by those who can use 
it, but not necessarilly beyond.


You and I have a fundamental disagreement here which cannot be resolved. 
You are saying that I should not be able to see or use characters used 
only in languages that I do not understand.  I claim that a universal 
character encoding is beneficial to all, and that it is my problem if I 
don't have adequate fonts or knowledge to read the text.


--
Doug Ewell  |  Thornton, Colorado, USA  |  http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14  |  ietf-languages @ http://is.gd/2kf0s ­

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Using xml2rfc (was: Re: Why the normative form of IETF Standards is ASCII)

[Doug Ewell]

Martin Rex  wrote:

If anything deserves the description "60's style document editing" 
then it is the current xml2rfc processing, which requires a whole 
bunch of extra software, lots of manual processing steps, reading of 
lots of documentation and plenty of time and desire for humiliation in 
order to test all those features through the manual self-torture 
process.


I'm probably not a good data point, since I've only contributed to two 
RFCs, and as a software developer I don't have much problem with using 
multiple tools to get the job done (or with writing XML).  But I have to 
take issue with the "humiliation and torture" scenario described by 
Martin.


I have never attempted to install xml2rfc on my local machine; I have 
only used the online version at http://xml.resource.org/, and while I 
would not lie and say the experience was completely trouble-free or that 
the documentation was always perfect, on no account was it torture, 
certainly not on the level that would discourage me from writing another 
I-D.  (Endless WG lily-gilding and tolerance of career trolls might, 
though.)


In particular, with my heavily text-based drafts, in most cases I found 
xml2rfc perfectly adequate to handle formatting.  If you really care 
about the exact formatting, you're going to have to go back and forth 
between the editor output and your browser anyway, since browsers can 
differ in their output.


One phenomenon that always emerges from this joint character-set/RFC 
format discussion, every time it comes up, is that someone feels there 
should be one and only one process and tool set for writing I-Ds, and 
someone else feels the need to wave the "Don't Tread on Me" flag in 
protest.


--
Doug Ewell  |  Thornton, Colorado, USA  |  http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14  |  ietf-languages @ http://is.gd/2kf0s ­

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77

[Jari Arkko]

I propose $40 for a seat at the table in the front of the meeting 
rooms, $20 for a seat toward the front with extra legroom and $100 for 
an exit row.


Ability to escape seems most valuable ;-) Maybe we could also work out 
something based on premium Internet access ($29.90/day) vs. ability to 
read Internet drafts and other ietf.org content (free).


Jari

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Audio Streaming Update 3/21 - IETF 77 March 21-26, 2010

[Marshall Eubanks]

Dear Joel;

Will the plenaries be streamed as "California C" ?

Regards
Marshall

On Mar 21, 2010, at 11:57 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:


Greetings,

The following is an update on the state of the audio streaming for
Sunday march 21.

The following two sessions will be streamed on Channel-7 (Palos  
Verdes)


1000-1200  IEPG Meeting - Palos Verdes
1300-1450  Newcomer's Training - Palos Verdes

http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf777.m3u

Standard information follows.

-Audio Streaming-

All 8 parallel tracks at the IETF 77 meeting will be broadcast  
starting

with the commencement of working group sessions on Monday, March 22,
2010 at 0900 PDT (UTC-7) and continue until Friday the 26th at 1515
PDT. Additionally it is our intention to broadcast the IEPG meeting
occurring on Sunday the 21st starting at 1000 PDT.

Because I have been asked several times in the past, note that if you
wish to use the rooms that are being recorded for impromptu meeting
during unscheduled sessions or lunch breaks that you can invite remote
participants to tune in to the appropriate stream. Recording cannot be
guaranteed for unscheduled sessions. Conversely, it should never be
assumed that recording or observation is not occurring on open
microphones, they are after all connected to the Internet.

The links for streaming sources and the schedule are best retrieved  
from

the IETF tools agenda, located here:

http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/77/

A page in the legacy style with links to the archives will also be
available here (it is not presently):

http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/

The links and associated playlist channel bindings (in place during  
the

meeting) are as follows:

California Ach1 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf771.m3u
California Bch2 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf772.m3u
California Cch3 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf773.m3u
California Dch4 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf774.m3u
Huntingoton ch5 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf775.m3u
Manhattan   ch6 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf776.m3u
Palos Verdesch7 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf777.m3u
Redondo ch8 http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf778.m3u

and

All ch* http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf77.m3u

Regards
Joel Jaeggli




___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf



___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: [77all] No Host for IETF 77

[Arnt Gulbrandsen]

On 03/23/2010 02:18 AM, Jorge Amodio wrote:

Get a dunk tank and some of the most famous IETF trolls and charge $20 for
3 tries to get the troll on the tank.


Then gnash your teeth to stumps later, when you have to read a troll's 
forty-seventh proud proclamation of how he is single-handedly 
responsible for the IETF's financial well-being.


There's nothing quite like a troll who's right.

Arnt
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf