Le 2013-03-12 à 11:19, Mary Barnes mary.ietf.bar...@gmail.com a écrit :
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Michael StJohns mstjo...@comcast.net
wrote:
At 07:56 AM 3/12/2013, Dan Harkins wrote:
While these studies are interesting and thought provoking, I think it is
wrong, and very
Le 2013-03-12 à 14:45, John C Klensin john-i...@jck.com a écrit :
Hi
At last night's plenary, I raised some related issues about the
difficulties posed by the interactions between current systems
for developing and editing documents working groups through the
approval and publication
Le 2013-03-11 à 12:41, Fred Baker (fred) f...@cisco.com a écrit :
On Mar 10, 2013, at 1:57 PM, Spencer Dawkins spen...@wonderhamster.org
wrote:
On 3/10/2013 5:22 AM, IETF Diversity wrote:
I'm listed as a signatory and agree that this is important.
There are several steps that could
Le 2013-03-11 à 13:43, Arturo Servin arturo.ser...@gmail.com a écrit :
Hi,
I have been reading the comments in the list and although I am not
making a specific reply to any message I would like to make some comments.
So far I have read I agree we need some diversity or I
Le 2013-02-07 à 09:46, Thomas Narten a écrit :
It is good to document what we have been doing. But the text seems to
focus on technology and tools…
I agree and disagree.
IMO, what is missing is operational Best Practices. We seem to be
lacking them (are any written down?) And we don't
Le 2012-12-13 à 09:16, Adrian Farrel a écrit :
I'm interested in this idea.
However, I note that an implementation status section of a document is
frozen
in time when a document goes to RFC.
I wonder whether we could leverage our tools and do something similar to IPR
disclosures. That
Le 2012-12-13 à 09:52, Yaron Sheffer a écrit :
Hi Adrian,
I would suggest to start with my proposal, because it requires zero
implementation effort.
disagree. phase 1: use IETF wiki. phase 2: develop an widget within data
tracker.
Marc.
If this catches on, I see a lot of value in
effort.
- I replied: well, phase 1 (of put it online within our site) can be done with
almost zero implementation effort. phase 2 requires some work (I'd say not that
big) for implementation/tools.
Regards, Marc.
Thanks,
Yaron
On 12/13/2012 04:55 PM, Marc Blanchet wrote:
Le 2012
-D gets messy, replace text in I-D with pointer to
wiki.
When/if experiment looks like a success, replace all above with data tracker
tool and allow it to persist for RFCs.
makes sense to me.
Marc.
Adrian
-Original Message-
From: Marc Blanchet [mailto:marc.blanc...@viagenie.ca
in the I-D gets messy, replace text in I-D with pointer to
wiki.
When/if experiment looks like a success, replace all above with data tracker
tool and allow it to persist for RFCs.
Adrian
-Original Message-
From: Marc Blanchet [mailto:marc.blanc...@viagenie.ca]
Sent: 13 December
Le 2012-12-05 à 04:25, Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) a écrit :
Hi Donald,
It's a question of costs and benefits. The cost of the IETF Announce
posting is small. There are not that many of them and I don't find
them to be a burden.
How many conference calls as part of working
Le 2012-11-27 à 13:00, Barry Leiba a écrit :
So here's my question:
Does the community want us to push back on those situations? Does the
community believe that the real IETF work is done on the mailing
lists, and not in the face-to-face meetings, to the extent that the
community would
cool!!! I will also be using this! thanks!
Marc.
Le 2012-07-31 à 11:16, Ole Jacobsen a écrit :
In The Internet Protocol Journal I have been using the following
citation format, best illustrated by an example:
Julien Meuric, Diego Caviglia, Don Fedyk, Attila Takacs, and Lou
Berger,
If I look around me, I see young people developing PHP, AJAX, … almost all of
this is not handled in IETF. If I look at company valuations recently, there
are at the same level in the stack: i.e. web apps. So I guess the plumbers
are getting old, but the designers are younger and not here.
I wonder if this document should be instead Informational status. I
don't see here a protocol, more an implementation optimisation.
Marc.
Le 11-01-13 18:58, The IESG a écrit :
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Scalable
we had a discussion about the same subject: i.e. should we restrict the
scope to a specific set of documents to review/update/... or do we keep
some provision for other documents coming in the stream that require
help of the newprep. I was arguing for the latter. To me, what you are
talking
Le 10-05-19 09:40, Peter Saint-Andre a écrit :
On 5/18/10 12:32 PM, Marc Blanchet wrote:
Le 10-05-18 14:27, Sam Hartman a écrit :
Marc == Marc Blanchetmarc.blanc...@viagenie.ca writes:
Marc we had a discussion about the same subject: i.e. should we
Marc restrict the scope
Marshall Eubanks a écrit :
Emergencies. An emergency is defined as there is a problem with the
TLP that is likely to be abused. In these cases, the trust can publish
a modified text for a 2 week review period, then modify the TLP. The
Trust must explain the reason for the change.
I
Marshall Eubanks a écrit :
On Aug 17, 2009, at 11:25 AM, Marc Blanchet wrote:
Marshall Eubanks a écrit :
Emergencies. An emergency is defined as there is a problem with the
TLP that is likely to be abused. In these cases, the trust can
publish
a modified text for a 2 week review
Ralph Droms a écrit :
Christian - I think address selection is part but not all of the problem.
I would be happy to see a summary of current practice in dealing with
simultaneous attachment to multiple networks. How does an iPhone decide
between its WiFi and dell interfaces? How does an RG
Christian's suggestion is one way. not sure it is complete.
but I don't agree with you (Deng): i.e. I think this suggestion is in
scope of MIF wg. Maybe the outcome of the wg is a best practice document
that tells application developers how to write good applications in
context of MIF, where one
Giyeong Son a écrit :
I think we may need to understand what are the real problems that
people/organizations (i.e. carriers, ISPs and vendors and users) have
been currently struggling with in terms of simultaneous use of multiple
networks.
there is a first cut in
Jari Arkko a écrit :
This revision includes the removal of the BCP document. I am hoping that
also helps in other problems people had with this charter, as it becomes
even clearer that the WG will not develop solutions, its really only
about describing the problem and existing practices.
Jari Arkko a écrit :
But my main point is that the MIF charter covers -- on purpose -- a
relatively large problem area. We need to describe the problem as
experienced by real-life implementations without constraining ourselves
too much at this stage. Once we finally understand the problem
Le 07-07-01 à 20:24, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino a écrit :
you right. we have been running dual stack network since 1998 or
something (Marc Blanchet should have the real answer),
Chicago IETF 42nd. Aug 1998.
Marc.
-
IPv6 book: Migrating to IPv6, Wiley, 2006, http
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
--
Marc Blanchet
Hexago
tel: +1-418-266-5533x225
--
http://www.freenet6.net: IPv6 connectivity
InternetWorking www.brandenburg.com
Sunnyvale, CA USA tel:+1.408.246.8253
--
Marc Blanchet
Hexago
tel: +1-418-266-5533x225
--
http://www.freenet6.net: IPv6 connectivity
--
to use email addresses and sites in their own countries. Even
if they are familiar with the Latin script, it is very often a very bad
match for their languages, making it very difficult to figure out how
native words would be spelled in it.
Mark
--
Marc
--
Marc Blanchet
Hexago
tel: +1-418-266-5533x225
--
http://www.freenet6.net: IPv6 connectivity
--
in Europe
will need to schedule their flight on Saturday.
Thanks
Cedric
--
Marc Blanchet
Viagénie
tel: +1-418-656-9254x225
--
http://www.freenet6.net: IPv6 connectivity
)
--
Marc Blanchet
Viagénie
tel: +1-418-656-9254x225
--
http://www.freenet6.net: IPv6 connectivity
--
http://www.normos.org: IETF(RFC,draft),
IANA,W3C,... standards.
--
Hi,
for references purposes, I tried to find in the RFCs without success a
reference describing the arp self mechanism, which is used by many
implementations in IPv4 to verify the usability of an address. Anyone can
help me find the reference?
thanks in advance.
Marc.
PS. just
A 15 2C 32
Marc Blanchet
Viagnie inc.
tel: 418-656-9254
http://www.viagenie.qc.ca
--
Normos (http://www.normos.org): Internet standards portal:
IETF RFC, drafts, IANA, W3C, ATMForum, ISO, ... all in one place.
ernational, so
centrally located is an interesting question: center of the earth (probably
enough hot...;-))).
back on work...
Marc.
Take care,
Marc Blanchet
Viagnie inc.
tel: 418-656-9254
http://www.viagenie.qc.ca
--
No
F mailing list might not
be the right venue for continued conversation.
--bill
Marc Blanchet
Viagénie inc.
tel: 418-656-9254
http://www.viagenie.qc.ca
--
Normos (http://www.normos.org): Internet standards portal:
IETF RFC, drafts, IANA, W3C, AT
):
http://www.normos.org/ietf/draft.tgz
ftp://ftp.normos.org/ietf/draft.tgz
rfcs (36M, tar-gzipped):
http://www.normos.org/ietf/rfc.tgz
ftp://ftp.normos.org/ietf/rfc.tgz
Regards, Marc.
Marc Blanchet
Viagénie inc.
tel: 418-656-9254
http://www.viagenie.qc.ca
Agendas (37K, tar-gzipped):
http://www.normos.org/ietf/ietf-agendas.tgz
ftp://ftp.normos.org/ietf/ietf-agendas.tgz
Regards, Marc.
Marc Blanchet
Viagénie inc.
tel: 418-656-9254
http://www.viagenie.qc.ca
--
Normos (http://www.normos.org
At 10:49 2000-02-16 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Noticed this one this morning:
--- start excerpt
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
Title : Compatible Internationalized Domain Names Using
ng/in-addr-audit.html be
interpreted to give a useful representation of how much space is
assignmed/allocated?
randy
---
Marc Blanchet | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Viagénie inc. | http://www.viagenie.qc.ca
39 matches
Mail list logo
