I invite the IETF community to read this draft and discuss the choices
it suggests, between now and the Montreal IETF.
Brian
Original Message
Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-carpenter-newtrk-questions-00.txt
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 15:50:01 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To:
On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 09:17 +0200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-carpenter-newtrk-questions-00.txt
,---
|The three possible ways forward are:
|
| 1. Agree that, apart from day to day efforts to improve efficiency,
|
My perception is that often in the IETF, protocol and process design
works best that codifies and regularizes what is already being deployed.
The model that seems to be emerging is that we now have a lot of
revisions of first-generation protocols, with the recent slew of LDAP
announcements
Hi Mike,
Two organizations: IAB and RFC Editor
Two document series: Internet Standards and RFCs
The RFC Editor through agreement with the IAB and with funding
from the ISOC publishes the Internet Standards series under the
banner of the RFC Series.
I'll grant that you have a much
What a difference a single word can make. I do agree you
could read this in the manner in which you read it, but that would
require completely ignoring the history of the RFC Editor project and the
fact it has always been at ISI. E.g. sometimes to understand what
the law is you have to read the
What a difference a single word can make. I do agree you
could read this in the manner in which you read it, but that would
require completely ignoring the history of the RFC Editor project and the
fact it has always been at ISI. E.g. sometimes to understand what
the law is you have to read the
