I note that the term user appears only twice (not as possible
interlocutors or contributors) in the Internationalization program
section. There are now more than two months that Jefsey Morfin has appealed
the IAB over the IDNA2008 publication informational context. There is no
answer yet.
One of the contributors, in my opinion, to the evolution of an ad hoc meeting
in a bar to Bar Bof as Fred defines it has been a series of small actions,
intended to facilitate the organization ad hoc meetings, that have had the
unintended consequence of increasing the apparent close
At 22:00 +0200 7/29/10, Fred Baker wrote:
If we're going to continue this avalanche of ad hoc meetings that we call
Bar BOFs, I would recommend that the Secretariat provide a web page for
requesting them. The title of the web page should be Poorly Planned
Meetings or something like that.
In
On 08/06/2010 02:45 PM, Ralph Droms wrote:
I will confess to describing a problem here without suggesting an associated
solution.
The natural consequence of your mail seems to be to allow attendees to
book spare space at IETF events. Suggested rules:
1. Space is booked by an individual
I understand that Blue Sheet has been the tradition of IETF to track the
attendees to each working group. But people's hand writing is all different,
it takes some work to track the names and contact information on Blue Sheet.
IEEE802 has moved to On-Line attendee log
IEEE802 uses formal voting (during its meetings) to determine issues and to
accept proposals (or motions) to add or delete text from documents that are
being developed.
In addition, IEEE802 has rules for how many meetings a person has to attend
to develop voting rights, and thereafter, how many
Martin,
Thank you for the information below.
Regarding the missing reference to XML, you are correct: Given that the
principal syntax is XML, a normative reference to
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-20081126/ is required. This will be added to
the next version of the DSKPP I-D.
Andrea
Hi,
On Aug 6, 2010, at 4:36 AM, Ed Juskevicius wrote:
IEEE802 uses formal voting (during its meetings) to determine issues and to
accept proposals (or motions) to add or delete text from documents that are
being developed.
...
The IETF WG process is very different from IEEE802, and that
Bob -
Would it be possible to get two additional version of this chart?
1) Including only those who were nomcom eligible (3 of 5 of the last meetings)
at each meeting.
2) Including only those who were one of WG chair, document editor or author for
a an active document at that meeting (e.g. WG
Mike,
On Aug 6, 2010, at 2:18 PM, Michael StJohns wrote:
Bob -
Would it be possible to get two additional version of this chart?
1) Including only those who were nomcom eligible (3 of 5 of the last
meetings) at each meeting.
2) Including only those who were one of WG chair, document
On 06/08/10 21:44, Bob Hinden wrote:
It appears to me that a 1-1-1 meeting policy is justified by current overall
IETF meeting attendance.
Your comments are appreciated.
Personally, I think all meetings should be near, but not quite in,
Dublin, though my liver disagrees:-)
The numbers do
Dave,
These numbers probably need to be correlated with the venue of each meeting.
One would expect higher Asian attendance at an Asian venue, and so forth.
Controlling for venue could produce a very different interpretation of the
numbers.
I think that shows up clearly in the numbers.
From: Bob Hinden bob.hin...@gmail.com
I do note that it seems clear that registration is related to where
we meet. That show up pretty clearly the current data. So judging
where to have future meetings based on past participation will tend
to keep us where we used to
On Aug 7, 2010, at 12:37 AM, Bob Hinden wrote:
I do note that it seems clear that registration is related to where we meet.
That show up pretty clearly the current data. So judging where to have
future meetings based on past participation will tend to keep us where we
used to meet.
The IESG has received a request from the IS-IS for IP Internets WG (isis)
to consider the following document:
- 'Advertising Generic Information in IS-IS'
draft-ietf-isis-genapp-03.txt as a Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Unicast-Prefix-based IPv4 Multicast Addresses '
draft-ietf-mboned-ipv4-uni-based-mcast-06.txt as a Proposed Standard
This document is the product of the MBONE Deployment Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Ron Bonica and Dan
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Benchmarking Terminology for Protection Performance '
draft-ietf-bmwg-protection-term-09.txt as an Informational RFC
This document is the product of the Benchmarking Methodology Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Ron Bonica and Dan
17 matches
Mail list logo
