On 29 jun 2009, at 23:32, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 01:37:31PM -0700, David Morris wrote:
1000 years from now, it will certainly be easier to recover content
from
an ascii 'file' than an html, xml, or pdf 'file' created now. It is
probably an unjustified assumption that
The TXT versions do not print on my printer and have not printed
reliably on any printer I have ever owned.
I discovered by accident that, on my machine, simply opening a
text version in Microsoft Word gives a document which prints
properly, page breaks and all. (10 point Courier I think.)
Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
I remain heartily fed up that the HTML versions of documents that I
know were submitted with XML source are not available, nor is the XML
source.
The TXT versions do not print on my printer and have not printed
reliably on any printer I have ever owned.
just an
On 30 jun 2009, at 12:38, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
the way I've found that works reliably these days for printing I-Ds
and RFCs is to load them into OpenOffice's editor (oowriter) and use
print from there.
Somehow, OpenOffice managed to understand the formfeed character.
On the Mac you
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On the Mac you can still use lpr file but unfortunately the formfeeds
get lost when you do that.
I use enscript.
Melinda
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Please do not insult other people's abilities. The fact that some of
us can find something more fun to do than get a document without
embeded form feeds to print properly does not mean that we are less
expert than you.
If a grad student handed me a paper to review formatted in RFC format
I would
It is not the height of the barrier, it is the perception that people
are making nit-picking objections for the sake of rubbing people's
noses in the fact that they can decide where to put the bar.
If this was about really about quality or readability I would be a lot
more sympathetic. But when a
I reviewed the document draft-ietf-speermint-requirements-07.txt in general
and for its operational impact.
Operations directorate reviews are solicited primarily to help the area
directors improve their efficiency, particularly when preparing for IESG
telechats, and allowing them to focus on
Hello;
I am writing this to see what people think about creating a tlp-
discuss mailing list.
While I hope that the need for TLP revisions will diminish after the
current round is completed, it seems to several of the other Trustees
and to me that it might be a good idea to have an open
The TLP is the Trust Legal Provisions relating to IETF Documents.
The current TLP is located here: http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/
These Legal Provisions describe the rights and licenses that the IETF
Trust grants to others with respect to IETF Contributions and IETF
Documents; as
The IAOC received three proposals in response to the RFC Production Center
RFP by the 5:00 PM EDT deadline on June 29, 2009.
The proposers include:
1. Association Management Solutions, LLC www.amsl.com
2. HCL Technologies Ltd., www.hcl.in
3. Wipro Limited, www.wipro.com
The IAOC anticipates
On Jun 29, 2009, at 16:22, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
It is not the height of the barrier, it is the perception that
people are making nit-picking objections for the sake of rubbing
people's noses in the fact that they can decide where to put the bar.
In the more traditional publishing
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Document:
As announced previously, the revamped IETF website was scheduled to go
live this Monday, July 6th. However, given that the .00 version
Internet Draft deadline is also on Monday, we decided to postpone the
switchover to avoid the possibility, however slim, that I-D
submissions would be
(oops, forgot the gen-art list. Sorry for the repeat.)
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Document:
The IAOC received three proposals in response to the RFC Production Center
RFP by the 5:00 PM EDT deadline on June 29, 2009.
The proposers include:
1. Association Management Solutions, LLC www.amsl.com
2. HCL Technologies Ltd., www.hcl.in
3. Wipro Limited, www.wipro.com
The IAOC anticipates
As announced previously, the revamped IETF website was scheduled to go
live this Monday, July 6th. However, given that the .00 version
Internet Draft deadline is also on Monday, we decided to postpone the
switchover to avoid the possibility, however slim, that I-D
submissions would be
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 5576
Title: Source-Specific Media Attributes in the
Session Description Protocol (SDP)
Author: J. Lennox, J. Ott,
T. Schierl
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 5592
Title: Secure Shell Transport Model for
the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)
Author: D. Harrington, J. Salowey,
W. Hardaker
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 5590
Title: Transport Subsystem for the Simple
Network Management Protocol (SNMP)
Author: D. Harrington, J. Schoenwaelder
Status: Standards Track
21 matches
Mail list logo
