.
I am sure the document can be made even better (there have been good
suggestions in this thread), but I fully support a document of this kind
being published in some manner (I don't have an opinion if it should be
BCP or Informational RFC or something else).
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail
used to remote participation
and discussion, others seem to accumulate people who have a different
history so they tend to handle posts very differently.
Perhaps that's why the view on how well this works is so different between
different people?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
like to distinguish everyone
thinks this is fine from no one read the document.
Should people who supported the document within the WG LC generally avoid
voicing support in the IETF LC discussion?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
of entry. What would a 20-30 year old who started to use the
Internet 5-10 years ago feel about it? I don't know. What is the target
audience? A telecommunication professional? A student who might be a
would-be telecom profession? An App programmer? All of the above?
--
Mikael Abrahamsson
are
developed and how to participate.
Where is a good executive summary to give to upper management, outlining
why they should dedicate resources towards participating in the IETF?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
with IETF is that *nobody* is *excluded*, it
consists of all interested parties and the barrier of entry is really low.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
, the barrier of entry is probably the
lowest of any similar organisation I can think of.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
result
would probably be better, but more work would be needed, probably
resulting in less technical work being done.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
On Thu, 28 Mar 2013, Douglas Otis wrote:
IPv6 makes publishing IP address reputations impractical. Since IP
address reputation has been a primary method for identifying abusive
sources with IPv4, imposing ineffective and flaky replacement strategies
has an effect of deterring IPv6 use.
My
reputation ISPs I guess none of
this data should be trusted.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
3080548657 ecr
0,nop,wscale 7], length 0
13:58:13.746501 IP 12.22.58.30.80 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx.41603: Flags [S.], seq
4206253981, ack 3844537043, win 5792, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val
357513706 ecr 3080548657], length 0
Any specific reason for this? My host connects with wscale 7.
--
Mikael
, audio quality wasn't a problem (apart from the recording devices
causing hums and scratching sounds etc, but that's not the fault of
Meetecho I would imagine).
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
these efforts and hope we can end up in a situation where all
meetings at the IETF is recorded in this way.
Thanks.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
to participate that it's not already doing. Do you have
any suggestions?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
10 10:00:00 UTC 2013
$ date -u -d EDT 12:00 Mar 10 2013
Sun Mar 10 16:00:00 UTC 2013
$ date -u -d PDT 12:00 Mar 10 2013
Sun Mar 10 19:00:00 UTC 2013
So I guess one still has to keep track of daylight savings. Personally I
prefer to have local time for meetings, otherwise UTC is nice.
--
Mikael
definition of what it means to
implement or support an RFC when it comes to completness and what this
means as per following SHOULD and MAY.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
On Sat, 5 Jan 2013, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
Otherwise I think there needs to be better definition of what it means
to implement or support an RFC when it comes to completness and what
this means as per following SHOULD and MAY.
Also what it means following things in it that is not RFC2119
they said they said they were compliant in
supporting.
Ianal, but it feels that it should easier to do this if there are MUST and
SHOULD in there and I asked them to document all deviations from these.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
, pitching
idea, asking if it was relevant to the WG) to not get responded to.
Perhaps it was irrelevant or uninteresting but nobody wanted to say so. I
don't know, if I don't get a response, I tend not to push the issue.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
of the IETF model,
some WGs really work well in this aspect.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
to participate with less than 1s RTT
including encoding delays etc, at least if the system is located at the
same place or fairly close to the venue (at least so the signal doesn't
have to be bounced half way around the world before it's sent to the final
destination).
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail
outside of
meetings?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
to meetings
though. I'm happy for that.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
if there are going to be protests, it'll be some other group.
Of course, 2013 is a long way out so there is no way to tell for sure, but
as someone else wrote, London right now shows that there is nothing that
is sure anywhere.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
willing to sponsor
the event, especially with helping out with practicalities.
Flights are plentyful to Bangkok from all over the world, though most
flights to/from the US seems to go via Japan.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
was met
with a few very vocal people against. I support this document.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
group to look at
this.
I have subscribed already.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
because it's a dead end, and we all know it. We're
just disagreeing when it's going to die and how.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
.
Would the people saying it's impossible please get out of the way of the
people actually doing it
I see absolutely no good reason not to start the work and do negotiations
with other SDOs on the side.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
and the only real alternative is full DHCPv6(-PD) with SAVI-like
functionality in the L2 equipment along the way (in v4 the L2 equipment
does DHCP-snooping and installs L3 filters accordingly).
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
31 matches
Mail list logo
