RE: Query to the community -- An additional IETF Meeting event?

+1 Its worth a try. I know IETF week is extremely busy for folks. There is the work that has to be done. There are dozens of private conversations folks want to have but IMHO we have to be realistic about making sure we are doing the right things to keep the meetings financially solvent in di

Re: Query to the community -- An additional IETF Meeting event?

Those vendors who want to organize themselves into a beer & gear should do so and then coordinate with the IETF early in the planning process in order to have space they can pay for. They can either pay the IETF or pay the hotel for the incremental meeting cost. There is no need for the IETF to t

Re: Last Call: (The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Status Code 308 (Permanent Redirect)) to Experimental RFC

On 2012-03-17 13:50, Julian Reschke wrote: Hi there, the IESG has approved the draft for publication as experimental, but a few details need some tuning. I plan to post a revised draft next Monday (when publication restarts), > ... Monday, March 26, actually...

Re: Last Call: (The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Status Code 308 (Permanent Redirect)) to Experimental RFC

Hi there, the IESG has approved the draft for publication as experimental, but a few details need some tuning. I plan to post a revised draft next Monday (when publication restarts), and have my current version available over here:

RE: Last Call: (Allocation of an Associated Channel Code Point for Use by ITU-T Ethernet based OAM) to Informational RFC

Hello, I support the allocation of an ACH codepoint to G.8113.1, not precluding the ITU-T to progress refinements. Ergo, i support this draft and proposal http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg72191.html. IMHO, the status quo analysis expressed in both http://www.ietf.org/

Re: Trade show at IETF

--On Friday, March 16, 2012 21:28 -0700 Joel jaeggli wrote: > On 3/16/12 20:04 , John C Klensin wrote: >> Note too that, if the company sends only five technical people >> and concludes that it doesn't suffer harm from that small a >> number, the odds of getting back up to 10 if the experiment

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC/Telechat review of draft-reschke-http-status-308-05

On 2012-03-16 22:06, Ben Campbell wrote: Apologies for the delayed response--the day job got in the way this week. Comments inline: On Mar 12, 2012, at 12:16 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: On 2012-03-12 17:15, Ben Campbell wrote: I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background o

Re: Query to the community -- An additional IETF Meeting event?

Hello everybody, The beer and gear seems to work pretty well at Nanog, and therefore it is a good idea to consider it for the IETF. However, I am a bit worried that we are, however, not seeing the difference between the IETF and Nanog. Nanog is a Network Operator Group. Hence, the name. Vendors co