Kuala Lumpur which we just used for APRICOT 2001. Five-star hotel, the Pan
Pacific $63 per night. Pay $93 and you're on the Executive floor with free
breakfast, etc. The hotel is next to a convention center. Food was very
inexpensive, with the exception of alcohol (Muslim country so you'd
At 11:20 28/03/2001 -0500, Melinda Shore wrote:
The cost thing is, I think, misleading. Having
had the experience of having to go to many ETSI
meetings, I've found that apart from a few
incredibly expensive cities it's generally cheaper
to go to Europe than it is to travel in the US.
strangely,
From: Dave Crocker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 10:10:29 -0800
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In-Reply-To: 2224339706.985771850@P2
References: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 06:30 AM 3/28/2001, John C Klensin wrote:
Subject to constraints of invitations and
John Stracke wrote:
"Mortonson, Robert W" wrote:
I find this most helpful. If only the ietf would do this for presentations
instead of just html. Then one can put together a reliable collection that is
completely portable for a meeting, conference, work on a plane, anywhere a active
Let's see, the price is right, the convention center has plenty of room,
there are loads of hotel rooms nearby. Hmm. Sounds great!
OK, I'll bite:
Kuala Lumpur which we just used for APRICOT 2001. Five-star hotel, the Pan
Pacific $63 per night.
Let's see, with the higher airfare and
At 07:32 PM 3/28/2001, Randy Bush wrote:
So Ole, Cisco will be hosting an IETF there when?
i think they co-hosted with qualcomm in san diego justthe other month.
when will you be hosting?
I've done it 1.5 times myself. How about you?
P.S., it was a joke Randy.
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, Dharani Vilwanathan wrote:
Hi,
Doesnt WORD preserve it? I thought WORD works well for RFCs. OSPFv2
RFC didnt print well, however.
I had the same problem with the same RFC (2328).
Some RFCs contain plenty of tabs, both in the ascii figures and in the
text itself.
At 06:40 AM 3/29/2001, Donald E. Eastlake 3rd wrote:
should. Should be 2 years, and we tend to run no better than 1. That
constrains choice and that either increases price or decreases convenience.
While it contrains choice, it does not necessarily increase price or
decrease convenience.
Harald Tveit Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
actually the cheapest place, hotel-price-wise, to hold IETFs would probably
be in a tourist trap on the off-season (the Riviera in October, after all
the bathers have gone home, but before the staff leaves the hotel...)
I say:
I have been reading these many excellent points for eleven days now. However, I note
that similar discussions occur after most IETFs. My own preference is that these
conversations not occur, since their (almost predictable) recurrence suggests that
this is more "venting" than "problem
John
Thanks for this exercise, which I have not been doing for quite some time.
Anyway hope this will help for your databases.
1. Hotels and Meeting Room
Mauritius has hosted several International conferences, seminars, Infotechs,
etc. and has all the structures in the one town called Grand
Network connectivty is kinda hard... we need about 3Mb/s outbound for the
multicast, in minnesota traffic peaked at around 10MB/s total according to
dave farmer... Would need to find a host like intelstat/inmarsat to drop
an earthstation on the roof of the hotel and backhual 10Mb/s to someplace
A few comments:
I'm very supportive of both trying to deploy multicast and trying to
make it possible to participate in IETF meetings from remote locations.
But if the current effort isn't working, maybe we need to try something
different.
Do you think the broadcasts
1. poll WG chairs from the last IETF to see how many people contributed
things in real time from remote locations.
Well, not relevant; most people listen, just as they
do when they are present (and BTW, this is a completely
legitimate reason to do the multicasts).
Dear Wang,
I used a network modelling language called TeD (Telecommunication
Description Language, http://www.cc.gatech.edu/computing/pads/teddoc.html)
for 1-2 years and is not bad, but it has programming limitations. Try SSFNet
(www.ssfnet.org), its (I suppose) directed successor.
Regards,
Eric-
I therefore suggest that we
either discontinue these many threads or else we establish
something like POISED to actually do something to scratch
these nagging itches.
Not a bad idea on the face of it. However, I believe that the hosts play a
large role in determining where we
On Thu, 29 Mar 2001, Keith Moore wrote:
1. poll WG chairs from the last IETF to see how many people contributed
things in real time from remote locations.
Well, not relevant; most people listen, just as they
do when they are present (and BTW, this is a completely
Just out of curiosity: Why aren't we using something like a RealAudio
stream? This seems to work well for everything from radio stations to
ICANN meetings. I know it only works ONE way, but I also know that
"questions from the multicast audience" are rarely heard anyway.
The thing about Real
Titto Patrignani wrote:
* Some RFCs contain plenty of tabs, both in the ascii figures and in the
* text itself. Text file tabs are assumed to jump to a column that is a
* multiple of 8 (that is 8,16,24,...). I don't know a way for specifying
* this in WORD.
* I defined a .dot
Why aren't we using something like a RealAudio stream?
please no. PowerPoint is bad enough. the last thing we need is
another thing to bias IETF away from open systems.
On Thu, 29 Mar 2001, Keith Moore wrote:
Why aren't we using something like a RealAudio stream?
please no. PowerPoint is bad enough. the last thing we need is
another thing to bias IETF away from open systems.
Last I checked, the basic player is free, and implementations exists for
Last I checked, the basic player is free, and implementations exists for
all the major platforms, which would put it on par with PDF/Acrobat reader
in my book.
it doesn't run on the platform I use, and on those rare occasions
where they happen to produce a player that runs under Linux
Oh, and of course Internet standards based players are available for
all platforms, right?
Sometimes I think your techno religion outweights any sense of reality,
Keith.
Ole
Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher
The Internet Protocol Journal
Office of the CTO, Cisco Systems
Tel: +1
Sometimes I think your techno religion outweights any sense of reality,
I'm interested in bringing about a better reality,
not preserving the current one.
Keith
Interesting logic.
So, meanwhile, you would rather we NOT use widely available tools
that allow "remote viewing" just because:
- They aren't standards based
- They aren't available on absolutely every platform
Isn't this counter to allowing more participation?
What's the alternative, wait
So, meanwhile, you would rather we NOT use widely available tools
that allow "remote viewing" just because:
no, I'm just saying that let's not take two steps backward in the
name of making one step forward. the formats that we're currently
using appear to run on more platforms (using a
Oh, and of course Internet standards based players are available for
all platforms, right?
Yes (for a larger value of "all" than RealPlayer supports). vic/vat/rat
are portable to many UNIX variants, and also run under Windows. I
think that MacOS is the only orphan in this scenario, but ISTR
Last I checked, the basic player is free, and implementations exists for
all the major platforms, which would put it on par with PDF/Acrobat reader
in my book.
what is the definition of "major platforms" here?
if you could supply a list of freely-available player
Last I checked, the basic player is free, and implementations exists for
all the major platforms, which would put it on par with PDF/Acrobat reader
in my book.
what is the definition of "major platforms" here?
if you could supply a list of freely-available player implementations
From: "Ole J. Jacobsen" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So, meanwhile, you would rather we NOT use widely available tools
that allow "remote viewing" just because:
- They aren't standards based
- They aren't available on absolutely every platform
Isn't this counter to allowing more participation?
According to the Real Web page:
Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 2000, Windows Me or Windows NT 4.0, MacOS
Yes, I know no Unix variants, but the above still covers a large portion
of IETF would-be participants. I am not suggesting that RealPlayer be
made the standard, just an option.
"Ole J. Jacobsen" wrote:
Just out of curiosity: Why aren't we using something like a RealAudio
stream? This seems to work well for everything from radio stations to
ICANN meetings. I know it only works ONE way, but I also know that
"questions from the multicast audience" are rarely heard
While the RFC should not contain tabs, if you find one, you can set Word as
follows:
Tools - Options - General - Measurements - Points
Format - Tabs - (multiple of 12)
Format - Font - Courier New - 12 pt
This should reproduce the page as intended.
-Original Message-
From: Bob Braden
From: "Ole J. Jacobsen" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
However. it now appears that the Real people have a new business
model. The player is no longer free, but part of some stupid subscription
service which allows "Access to the audio broadcast of every Major League
Baseball game this
where can free download ITU-T recommendation V.24?
LEI
I have been working on a conceptual protocol for a couple of months. The
protocol is related to transfer of streaming audio/video across the
internet. It is in the conceptual phase and I have no idea whether it can be
made into a real protocol. To know more about the portocol visit
"Yang, Lei" wrote:
where can free download ITU-T recommendation V.24?
Please note that 3 ITU-T Recommendations can be freely downloaded per
person (of course, these documents are copyrighted and cannot be
freely distributed on a website, for example!).
Go to the ITU-T website
RTP/RTCP is one such protocol already existing, what are you trying to do?
-Original Message-
From: Vivek Jishtu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 11:54 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Conceptual Protocol
I have been working on a conceptual protocol for a
when will you be hosting?
I've done it 1.5 times myself. How about you?
2002, i believe. working on it now.
randy
http://www.itu.int/itudoc/itu-t/rec/v/index.html
http://www.itu.int/publications/bookshop/how-to-buy.html#free
describes how to download free a limited set of ITU-T
Recommendations per year.
Bob
--
Robert Shaw [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ITU Internet Strategy and Policy Advisor
International
40 matches
Mail list logo
