Hi
The following is the work description of LCI (Link Characteristic Information
for Mobility). Jouni Korhonen, Hannes Tschofenig and I are thinkig of having a
new BOF in the IETF-66 on this subject (Target Area is TBD, but presumably, TSV
or RTA&Infra).
The problem statement is available via
Hi Harald,
> The tracker tracks
Sorry, I didn't realize where I would find RFC Editor notes in the public
tracker. I have now been properly educated.
> the RFC Editor note was modified (by me) on July 24, 2004.
> The reason was a comment from Ted Hardie on July 21,
> augumenting a DISCU
Hi Sam,
With the change that you have proposed below, I would support publication of
this document (and the running of this experiment).
While there are a number of small things we could tweak, I think that would
be a waste of time. This is good enough as a temporary measure to relieve
the curr
> "Margaret" == Margaret Wasserman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Margaret> This document defines an RFC3933 experiment in which we
Margaret> would temporarily give the IESG the authority to create
Margaret> new mailing list management procedures and enact them.
Margaret> The only
The tracker tracks
the RFC Editor note was modified (by me) on July 24, 2004. The reason
was a comment from Ted Hardie on July 21, augumenting a DISCUSS from
Steve Bellovin:
Steve (DISCUSS):
>he last paragraph of Section 2 should explain the relationship of this
document to RFC 3683.
There is an interesting lesson to be learned from our mailing list
management situation...
The mailing list procedures draft currently under discussion
(draft-hartman-mailinglist-experiment-01.txt) contains the following correct
assessment of our current mailing list management situation:
"R
There are certainly some major weaknesses in the current IETF mailing list
management procedures, and those weaknesses are very well-described in this
document. I agree that we need to address those weaknesses. However, I am
not sure that I agree with the fix proposed in this document.
This doc
