On 18/03/2013 22:10, Carsten Bormann wrote:
I wouldn't mind replacing my blue dot with an indication *what* WG I chair,
and in which area that is.
Might be a bit more logistics when chairs change, but nothing that can't be
solved with a DYMO labelmaker.
I can only speak for myself, but I
While I appreciate the minimalist approach, can we please get one
*phrase* each on what is being referenced, so that people might have
some reason to actually read the reference:
Internet Registries [ASOMOU] and documented in [ICANNv4],
[ICANNv6], and [ICANNASN].
Also, I note that
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
I would just like to say I'm very grateful for the WGs that used Meetecho
to record their sessions. The HTML5 versions works out of the box with no
plugins in Chrome both on my Ubuntu 12.04 machine and Chrome on my
Windows7 machine. The sync of sound, slides,
Jeffrey == Jeffrey Haas jh...@pfrc.org writes:
Jeffrey Such an exercise would probably generate a lot less
Jeffrey controversy than my unsanctioned badge experiment.
Jeffrey http://pfrc.org/~jhaas/pictures/badge.jpg
nice.
Instead of getting a new badge every meeting, maybe we
On Mar 12, 2013, at 2:24 PM, Dan Harkins dhark...@lounge.org wrote:
I'd love to get out of this rat hole. Perhaps the signatories of the
open letter can restate the problem they see so it isn't made in terms of
race and gender.
The letter specifically mentioned the axes of race, gender,
Hi Martin,
thank you for your feedback. A couple of responses in-line.
I would really appreciate if the plenary recordings were not chopped down
is so many tiny pieces. It would be perfectly sufficient if there was
an overview page that gave the time positions of the individual parts.
This
Hi all, I was hoping that some of the remarks that I provided last year (e.g., http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg08965.html) would help to clarify the content of the document. That didnt quite happen...In earlier versions of the document I had the impression that the acct: URI
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013, Simon Pietro Romano wrote:
This actually depends on people's preferences. We are currently cutting
the recordings in pieces because we were asked to do so. Many people
prefer shorter, independent clips (each of which can be individually
downloaded from the server) rather
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013, alejandroacostaal...@gmail.com wrote:
I used to connect using a regular jabber client but the experience with
meetecho is much better. Having audio, chat room and the slides is fantastic.
I did not use the html5 version so my audio was using vlc, I had to modify our
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 08:22:46AM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
Jeffrey == Jeffrey Haas jh...@pfrc.org writes:
Jeffrey Such an exercise would probably generate a lot less
Jeffrey controversy than my unsanctioned badge experiment.
Jeffrey
On 3/18/2013 1:54 PM, Russ Housley wrote:
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/minutes/minutes-86-iesg-opsplenary
Please review and comment.
The difference between a 'venting' session and a 'working' session is
that the latter produces action items that actually produce further...
action.
On Mar 19, 2013, at 13:22, Michael Richardson m...@sandelman.ca wrote:
Instead of getting a new badge every meeting, maybe we should just get
an IETF86 dot on a badge we keep from meeting to meeting.
I want my badge on a shiny embossed metal plate with the words protocol
police on it.
Where
On 19/03/13 17:19, Carsten Bormann wrote:
On Mar 19, 2013, at 13:22, Michael Richardson m...@sandelman.ca wrote:
Instead of getting a new badge every meeting, maybe we should just get
an IETF86 dot on a badge we keep from meeting to meeting.
I want my badge on a shiny embossed metal plate
I want my badge to have my name and a small screen showing the room I
just came from.
In article 51489888.6050...@internet2.edu you write:
I want my badge to have my name and a small screen showing the room I
just came from.
I want the screen to show the room I'm going to next. And it should
be upside down so I can read it.
At 10:08 AM 3/19/2013, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 08:22:46AM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
Jeffrey == Jeffrey Haas jh...@pfrc.org writes:
Jeffrey Such an exercise would probably generate a lot less
Jeffrey controversy than my unsanctioned badge experiment.
On 03/19/2013 11:48 AM, John Levine wrote:
In article 51489888.6050...@internet2.edu you write:
I want my badge to have my name and a small screen showing the room I
just came from.
I want the screen to show the room I'm going to next. And it should
be upside down so I can read it.
And a
Doug == Doug Barton do...@dougbarton.us writes:
In article 51489888.6050...@internet2.edu you write:
I want my badge to have my name and a small screen showing the room I
just came from.
I want the screen to show the room I'm going to next. And it should
be upside
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013, Michael Richardson wrote:
Actually, I'd just settle for a badge that wasn't always backwards.
This *is* solvable. We've been using double-sided badges at APRICOT
for years, they look the same flipped or flopped. Of course this would
require (gasp) two sets of dots, I am
snip
Actually, I'd just settle for a badge that wasn't always backwards.
While I can't claim that it is 'always' backwards - perhaps a simple(?)
solution is to print the identifying information (whatever is decided) on
both sides?
[Wait - does that double the number of dots :)? Hmmm...]
- S
Hi Dave,
At 08:01 19-03-2013, Dave Crocker wrote:
The difference between a 'venting' session and a 'working' session
is that the latter produces action items that actually produce
further... action.
Yes.
For the most part, the open microphone portion of plenaries tends to
serve merely as
David:
1) In Section 1, goal #2, Hierarchical Allocation, I believe a reference
the definition in RFC 5226 - Section 4.1. Well-Known IANA Policy
Definitions, should be considered.
We could do so, but I do not believe that the few word in RFC 5226 on
hierarchical allocation improve the
As I mentioned in the mic during the IAB-sponsored Discussion of WCIT,
during the week I had the opportunity to talk and interact to some of
the policy fellows invited by ISOC (in general were people from the
national regulator or from the ministry of telecommunications -AFAIK-).
I also
Obviously not part of the basic note-taking effort, but I suggest that
IETF management groups explicitly consider the task of augmenting the notes
with published action items they are taking from the sessions.
Along that line, I'll note the notes from the App Area chairs meeting,
which we've
On 03/19/13 19:50, Michael StJohns allegedly wrote:
There's a long history of martian badges at the IETF. During the Stanford
IETF many many years ago, there were something like a dozen Milo Medin
badges (and I seem to remember at one point Milo was wearing none of them),
as well as badges
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/19/13 20:38, Michael Richardson allegedly wrote:
Actually, I'd just settle for a badge that wasn't always
backwards.
It costs a lot more to get lanyards that attach at two corners.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (Darwin)
On 3/19/2013 4:09 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
It costs a lot more to get lanyards that attach at two corners.
Why am I encouraged every time I come across a problem that can be
solved with duct tape? :-)
Spencer
In article 5148d415.1000...@internet2.edu you write:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/19/13 20:38, Michael Richardson allegedly wrote:
Actually, I'd just settle for a badge that wasn't always
backwards.
It costs a lot more to get lanyards that attach at two corners.
If our
Oh, please, not an T-shirt designed by an IETF working group!
I can just see the list of MUST, SHOULD and MAY have attributes,
and how large is large anyway?
Ole
Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972 Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
On 3/19/13 4:19 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
I want my badge on a shiny embossed metal plate with the words
protocol police on it. Where do I have to apply?
If memory serves, HP offered such a badge as Interop schwag in the
late '80s. Another old timer, Erik Fair, actually kept his for a few
On Mar 14, 2013, at 9:13 AM, Mary Barnes mary.ietf.bar...@gmail.com wrote:
That's a really good idea!
Mary.
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Ted Lemon ted.le...@nominum.com wrote:
I think it might also be worth encouraging working group chairs to have
working group breakfast or lunch
On Mar 14, 2013, at 7:03 AM, Ted Lemon ted.le...@nominum.com wrote:
I think it might also be worth encouraging working group chairs to have
working group breakfast or lunch meetings (RSVP required) where newcomers are
invited to come meet the chairs and chairs can strategically invite a few
On Mar 19, 2013, at 6:07 PM, Ben Campbell b...@nostrum.com wrote:
On Mar 14, 2013, at 9:13 AM, Mary Barnes mary.ietf.bar...@gmail.com wrote:
That's a really good idea!
Mary.
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Ted Lemon ted.le...@nominum.com wrote:
I think it might also be worth
On Mar 18, 2013, at 7:42 AM, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net wrote:
Seriously though, I am roughly in the same camp as Seiichi. The real
introduction of someone into the IETF is mostly about finding discussion
partners around the reason why the person came to the IETF to begin with.
Most
On 3/19/2013 8:01 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
I think this means we should closely consider the goals of a mentoring effort.
Is it to help them navigate the IETF structure, personalities, and immune
system to get something done? Is it to help them become the next generation of
IETF leaders? I
On 3/19/13 14:48 , Russ Housley wrote:
David:
1) In Section 1, goal #2, Hierarchical Allocation, I believe a reference the
definition in RFC 5226 - Section 4.1. Well-Known IANA Policy Definitions, should be
considered.
We could do so, but I do not believe that the few word in RFC 5226 on
The IESG has received a request from the Network File System Version 4 WG
(nfsv4) to consider the following document:
- 'Network File System (NFS) Version 4 Protocol'
draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis-25.txt as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
The IESG has received a request from the Network File System Version 4 WG
(nfsv4) to consider the following document:
- 'Network File System (NFS) Version 4 External Data Representation
Standard (XDR) Description'
draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis-dot-x-16.txt as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans
38 matches
Mail list logo
