From: Ray Pelletier
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Moreover adjacency cannot be
avoided with 34 groups and 52 weeks.
[DR] Actually from the perspective of
a participant from a different continent than North America adjacency
of meetings scheduled in North Amer
Ray,
> We are working to schedule our events 18 - 24 months in advance to
> reduce the inconvenience for you and others.
This is a great advance. If there's some rough stuff about getting
the calendar process in place when we try this for the first time,
people need to remember what an awaited
Ray,
> We are working to schedule our events 18 - 24 months in advance to
> reduce the inconvenience for you and others.
This is a great advance. If there's some rough stuff about getting
the calendar process in place when we try this for the first time,
people need to remember what an awaited
On 05/17/2006 12:15 PM, Dave Crocker allegedly wrote:
> This is a community. It extends beyond the boundaries of the IETF and
> the IETF is not the "center' of that community.
Is there a center? Is there a centroid? If so, what/where?
___
Ietf mailin
inline.
John C Klensin wrote:
--On Wednesday, 17 May, 2006 09:31 -0400 Ray Pelletier
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
John,
Thanks for the feedback. Responses in line.
John C Klensin wrote:
Ray,
I don't know if there are other problems, but the events.cal
list appe
Hi, Ray,
Without reference to the useful discussion on 2006-2007 dates also in this
thread, I would like to thank you guys for putting the 2008-2010 stake in
the ground. It is easier for other SDOs to avoid us if we schedule before
they do.
And thanks for doing so, in a public way, so that y
John C Klensin wrote:
This is just my personal opinion, but I don't think that is good
enough. If we have "must avoid" entities, then we ought to be
establishing administrative<-> administrative liaisons/ contact
points as well as technical ones, we ought to be proactively
sending out lists a
Jordi,
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
Hi Ray,
I think it is very unfair, especially after previous comments done on this
topic some weeks ago, to keep ignoring in our calendar the already fixed
events of AfriNIC/AfNOG, APNIC and LACNIC.
I'm not saying they are not actually being considered, but t
--On Wednesday, 17 May, 2006 09:31 -0400 Ray Pelletier
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John,
> Thanks for the feedback. Responses in line.
>
> John C Klensin wrote:
>
>> Ray,
>>
>> I don't know if there are other problems, but the events.cal
>> list appears to have not been kept up to date:
>>
At least APNIC has no problems (forwarded with permission).
Regards
Marshall
Begin forwarded message:
From: Philip Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: May 17, 2006 11:07:45 AM EDT
To: Marshall Eubanks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Gaurab Raj Upadhaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Last Call: Prop
For information. I submitted yesterday the
http://jefsey.com/iesg-pr-appeal.pdf appeal against the last IESG
decision. That decision - together with an IESG disrespect of RFC
3066 Bis - creates different problems to maintain interoperability
between the local IANA registries and other language
Ray,
I don't know if there are other problems, but the events.cal
list appears to have not been kept up to date:
For example, starting from the present,
* 3GPP CN is shown as meeting 31 May- 2 June at location
TBD, but is definitely scheduled for Warsaw.
* 3GPP
John,
Thanks for the feedback. Responses in line.
John C Klensin wrote:
Ray,
I don't know if there are other problems, but the events.cal
list appears to have not been kept up to date:
As the opening paragraph for the page (
http://www.ietf.org/meetings/events.cal.html ) states:
The
On 17-May-2006, at 08:02, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
I'm not saying they are not actually being considered, but they aren't
listed in the calendar (http://www.ietf.org/meetings/
events.cal.html), while
others from other regions are all listed. In my opinion, either we
do that
calendar corre
Hi Ray,
I think it is very unfair, especially after previous comments done on this
topic some weeks ago, to keep ignoring in our calendar the already fixed
events of AfriNIC/AfNOG, APNIC and LACNIC.
I'm not saying they are not actually being considered, but they aren't
listed in the calendar (htt
All;
This is a 1 week Last Call for feedback on Version 01 proposed 2008 -
1010 IETF Meeting dates. The IAOC anticipates taking action to formally
adopt dates on 25 May 2006. These dates differ from the originally
proposed dates based upon community feedback, a review of meeting dates
of th
16 matches
Mail list logo
