Dave, I think that the requirements for a successful last call depend
on how much review and interest have been demonstrated before the last
call.
For example, I recently last called draft-housley-cms-fw-wrap. It
received no last call comments. What should I do with the draft?
Well, in that
Peter == Peter Constable [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From: Dave Crocker [EMAIL PROTECTED] It occurs to me that a
Last Call for an independent submission has an
Peter added
requirement to satisfy, namely that the community supports
adoption of
Peter the work.
We
Sam == Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Harald == Harald Tveit Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Harald I think this line of thought has died down without any
Harald great disagreement the consensus seems to be that the
Harald following sentence:
Harald The IAOC
Wijnen, == Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wijnen, The current text in section 3, 1st para states
Wijnen, The IAOC consists of volunteers,
Wijnen, does that not say enough?
I think it does. I haven't seen an argument for why more text is
needed in the
Christian == Christian Huitema [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Christian Could you please pursue this rather technical
Christian discussion on a specialized list, rather than the main
Christian IETF list?
There is sort of this problem that most of this traffic is last call
comments on a
Soininen == Soininen Jonne (Nokia-NET/Helsinki) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Soininen x.x IAOC members compensation for labor, travel, and
Soininen other costs
Soininen The IAOC membership is considered voluntary. Hence, the
Soininen costs sustained by the members to participate
Brian == Brian E Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian According to Merriam-Webster online: Main Entry: 2 minute
Brian Function: transitive verb Inflected Form(s): min?ut?ed;
Brian min?ut?ing : to make notes or a brief summary of
Brian Brian
Brian Sam Hartman wrote
John == John Leslie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JohnThe whole idea here, I thought, was to set up a support
John structure which would just work -- so that it could be
John invisible to the IESG and never need to be discussed by
John that group. (The problem, I thought, was
Harald == Harald Tveit Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Harald I suggest resolving this by adding the following text to
Harald section 3.4 IAOC decision making, after the first
Harald paragraph:
Harald All IAOC decisions are minuted. Minutes are published
Harald
John == John C Klensin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John --On Thursday, 23 December, 2004 09:42 -0800 Carl Malamud
John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi John -
Your note seems like an outlier. In particular, it takes a
really *strong* stance on protecting people from each
I think your proposed three changes are a significant improvement over
the current text. As I've said, I am willing to live with the current
text but do not consider it ideal.
--Sam
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
John == John C Klensin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John Harald,
John Sorry, but I've got a procedural problem with this. I-Ds
John can't obsolete anything, even I-Ds approved by the IESG.
John While fiddle with the RFC Editor note in the
John announcement... may be the usual
William == William Allen Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
William John C Klensin wrote:
Then these need the bad designation, not just the not really
interesting any more one. And that, presumably, requires a
1828/1829 considered harmful document, or at least a
paragraph
Bruce == Bruce Lilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bruce If there really are only 24 items of less than 11 octets
Bruce each, a trivial solution is to simply list them (with the
Bruce usual ABNF syntax) as literal strings. That should take no
Bruce more than a half-dozen lines.
Simon == Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon In general, I support your goal of permitting free software
Simon to fully use IETF standards. A few specific comments
Simon below, which should be taken as encouragement to continue
Simon and refine the terms, not
Scott == Scott Bradner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Scott open from last version
I'd change BCP publication to using its normal consensus
processes (BCP is no magic term and may not survive the newtrk
process)
Scott I did not see anyone speak up to support the use of the
Lynn == Lynn St Amour [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Lynn over 80% of ISOC's org. members donate less than $10K
Lynn annually and managing these in a 'restricted accounting
Lynn manner' requires more effort and overhead. Also,
Lynn organizations/donors expect recognition appropriate
JFC == JFC (Jefsey) Morfin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JFC Tax aspects on donations will, most probaly in many
JFC countries, call for donations to a legally incorporated
JFC entity. What is the IETF legal entity I am to write on the
JFC check and then claim for resulting tax
Bruce == Bruce Lilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 12:14:42 -0800 From: Randy Presuhn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Ietf-languages
Digest, Vol 24, Issue 5 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi -
I've been thinknig more about the issue of the appeal process. Here
are some of the questions I have considered and the answers I've
found. First, can I provide something I'd like better than the
current text? The obvious candidate is the text in
draft-ietf-iasa-bcp-00. This would be
I'm not very comfortable with the appeal text in section 3.4. There
isn't a way to overturn decisions and there is no way to appeal
decisions because the wrong decision was made.
I understand why the current text is there. I understand there are
significant concerns about having either of
Simon == Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] (scott bradner) writes:
For IDN, I want to be able to extract the tables from RFC 3454
and use them in my implementation.
For Kerberos, I want to be able to use the ASN.1 schema in my
Harald == Harald Tveit Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Harald6. The IETF, through the IASA, shall have a perpetual
Harald right to use, display, distribute, reproduce, modify and
Harald create derivatives of all data created in support of IETF
Harald activities.
Harald == Harald Tveit Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Harald --On tirsdag, desember 07, 2004 04:49:36 -0500 Sam Hartman
Harald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Harald == Harald Tveit Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Harald 6. The IETF, through the IASA, shall have
avri == avri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
avri OK, I am open to the idea. And I suppose that the current
avri appeal mechanisms would allow it.
avri But in that case I do have a problem with making the barrier
avri higher for appeals originating from a non IOAC member.
avri
Scott == Scott Bradner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Scott but as I said before - I expect we will be close to failure
Scott if the IAD proceeds on the basis of a close vote in the
Scott IAOC. I'd rather that mininum vote required to proceed (in
Scott those cases where a vote is
Scott == Scott Bradner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Scott section 5.3 goes on to say Designated monetary donations
Scott will be credited to the appropriate IASA account.
Scott a left over reference to a seperate account
To me this doesn't imply bank accounts; internal accounting that
Margaret == Margaret Wasserman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Margaret At 3:41 PM +0100 12/1/04, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Yes, I've always assumed there will be an MOU between IETF and
ISOC, both to recognize the BCP when we have it, and to make
explicit some of these boundary
Michael == Michael StJohns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Michael It seems to me that neither ID status nor RFC status are
Michael appropriate for these documents. The ID series is, by
Michael design, ephemeral and generally not citeable. The RFC
Michael series is stable and
Carl == Carl Malamud [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Carl It seems to me that one of the goals of the whole AdminRest
Carl exercise has been to move overall management responsibility
Carl for IETF admin. and support activities (IASA) from
Carl contractors to a program manager, which
John == John C Klensin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John Bert, _Far_ too much detail. See earlier note about the
John bank account material. I suspect that I speak for many
John members of the community when I say that I want to get this
John admin stuff fixed, and fixed as
Harald == Harald Tveit Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Harald Quoting from section 3:
The IASA will initially consist of a single full-time ISOC
employee, the IETF Administrative Director (IAD), who will be
an officer entitled to act on behalf of the IASA at the
Erik == Erik Huizer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Erik My sense is that an IAB chair is probably very well informed
Erik and will have very good insight into all the issues
Erik surrounding the IASA. Therefore it makes sense to give the
Erik IAB chair a vote.
The reason it would not
Brian == Brian Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian You guys don't have a problem with the defensive
Brian suspension/no first use clauses, do you?
There is not consensus in the free software community on this issue.
I believe the Open Source Initiative (opensource.org) is OK with such
Dave == Dave Crocker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dave My focus is on knowing what the details of the jobs are that
Dave we want done. Referring to the interface(s) is a convenient
Dave technique for trying to surface those details.
Dave Currently we do not have the details. What
scott == scott bradner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you understand the open source position and disagree with
it, then there's probably little more to say.
scott If the position is that the open source community can take
scott an IETF consensus-based standard, modify it and
scott == scott bradner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
scott seems to be a reliable way to ensure that there are
scott multiple understandings of what the standard actually is -
scott I find it hard to understand who that is good for
Do you think that trying to describe a modified version
Eric == Eric S Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Eric You've had two direct warnings about this -- the ASF and
Eric Debian open letters. They interpreted IETF's passivity on
Eric the Sender-ID patent issue as damage and routed around it.
Eric If the IETF doesn't get its act
Lyndon == Lyndon Nerenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Lyndon Finally, we need to address the issue of the MD5 break.
Lyndon I have held off from commenting on this issue until the
Lyndon community has seen explicit evidence of the attack, and
Lyndon the implications of it. At this
Bob == Bob Hinden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bob The ISOC is certainly not perfect and has had serious
Bob problems in the past. These problems have been solved and as
Bob far as I can tell the ISOC is working well. I would note
Bob that the ISOC was initially set up by
I'd like to express general support for scenario O.
I probably will not have time to read the document in sufficient
detail to agree with every point, but this looks like a good
direction.
--Sam
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Two things brought up in this thread disturb me. First, there seems
to be the idea that we should be choosing where IETFs are held for
political purposes--to make statements for or against certain
governments. I'm not quite sure this was said or implied, but if it
was, I'm made a bit
Hi. First I'd like to start off by saying that I think Carl's
document is a very good start for discussing these options.
I support the recommendations made in section 3. I believe they are
well justified and would be a great step in the right direction.
Section 3 talks about clarifying the
Aaron == Aaron Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Aaron On Sep 5, 2004, at 4:15 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
I do not think that recommendation 7 in scenario B is a good
idea. I believe that plenary time is full enough without
crowding it more.
Aaron What about a 'business
Eliot == Eliot Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Eliot Sam, As the person who most recently complained, let me
Eliot elaborate on my comments. The problem I believe we all are
Eliot facing is that the distinction between Proposed, Draft, and
Eliot Internet Standard has been lost.
Ken == Ken Hornstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What I'm really looking for is some form of official
government communication on the subject (unless of course the
hosts are the ones who are manning the passport control desks
at the airport).
So call the nearest
701 - 746 of 746 matches
Mail list logo
