--On Wednesday, 22 December, 2004 21:51 +0100 Harald Tveit
Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John,
I've probably seen enough versions of enough issues that I'm
more than a little spaced out.. but I think your proposal
looks very much like the in-draft version of the appeals
--On torsdag, desember 23, 2004 04:14:58 -0500 John C Klensin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--On Wednesday, 22 December, 2004 21:51 +0100 Harald Tveit
Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John,
I've probably seen enough versions of enough issues that I'm
more than a little spaced out.. but I
Joel,
Money has this tricky property of being fungible, which is what allows
governments, funding agencies, and even corporate finance people,
to play such games. But on the other hand, what do you expect ISOC to
do in a year when, for whatever reason, its general income is significantly
down and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think this is sufficient as well.
a.
On 22 dec 2004, at 15.22, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
The IAOC will establish and publish rules to handle conflict of
interest situations.
Yes, I think so. Profiting from a conflict of interest is pretty
much illegal anyway, so I
Kurtis comments on text suggested by Bernard:
On 2004-12-09, at 17.02, Bernard Aboba wrote:
Suggest this be rewritten to:
The IAOC is accountable for the structure of the IASA and thus decides
which functions are to be outsourced. All outsourcing must be via
well-defined contracts or
Ticket #733 questions whether it's right to state a principle that things
should be outsourced:
In principle, IETF administrative functions should be outsourced.
I would remove this sentence. We later say that it is the IAOC's
job to decide what is outsourced and what isn't, and I am more
Note to the IETF list...
Bert and I have now sent out notes on all the open tickets that are not
closely related to finances, except 739 and 728.
I've asked the editors to prepare a -03 I-D that can be published before
the holidays, incorporating the changes that seem agreed upon (which are
Responding to the items/topics that have been recorded as issue 727
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Margaret Wasserman
Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 20:54
To: ietf@ietf.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Last Call Comments on
accounting transparency is mentioned in a number of places already
it seems overly redundent to mention it here yet again - but its not
a big deal to me
Scott
-
Kurtis comments on text suggested by Bernard:
On 2004-12-09, at 17.02, Bernard Aboba wrote:
Suggest this be rewritten to:
Harald concludes:
I believe that these are valid reasons to keep the mention of the
outsourcing principle in section 3, so I suggest we close #723 with no
changes needed.
I agree
Scott
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
Inline
-Original Message-
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:53:32 -0500
To: ietf@ietf.org
From: Margaret Wasserman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Last Call Comments on draft-ietf-iasa-bcp-02.txt
...
behalf of the IASA at the direction of the IAOC. The IAD is likely
to draw on financial,
Issue 734 and 747 seem to be about the same thing.
Editors have accepeted that s/account/accounts/
and that change has been made in my editing buffer.
So I think both tickets can change to Document updated.
Bert
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
I don't think that there is a substantive issue here, just an
editorial one. What about just reusing Jorge's text, like this:
Margaret said (quoting the draft):
The IAD is responsible for ensuring that all contracts give the IASA
and the IETF all rights in data needed to satisfy
clearly fund raising expenses must be accounted for but, imo,
there is nothing special about fund raising expenses - there will
also be other overhead costs that will have to be seen as being in the
IASA budget (Bert mentions credit card fees, there is also office space,
legal support for
Inline
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Leslie
Daigle
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 22:29
To: Brian E Carpenter
Cc: ietf@ietf.org; Lynn St.Amour
Subject: Re: IASA BCP -02 Designated Donations - section 5.3
Let me try a
--On Thursday, 23 December, 2004 10:22 +0100 Harald Tveit
Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John,
...
I like all of those properties, and it should be a small
twist of language (starting from the text in the draft, not
the most recent suggestion) to make it come out that way.
But I'm
Lynn,
Inline
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Lynn St.Amour
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 01:45
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: IASA BCP -02 Reserves - section 2.2 /7 and 5.6
Bert, Rob,
please find below comments on reserves.
So I have made (for now) this change.
OLD:
5.4 Other ISOC Support
Other ISOC support shall be based on the budget process as specified
in Section 6. ISOC shall credit the appropriate IASA accounts at
least quarterly.
NEW:
5.4 Other ISOC Support
Other ISOC support
I think we need more discussion on this.
But let me add that Lynn had also made suggestions
as discussed in issue 740.
Maybe we should merge the 2 issues into one?
Bert
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Fred Baker
Sent: Thursday,
As a result of the discussion I have updated the text
and it currently looks as follows in my edit buffer:
section title=IASA Budget Process anchor=iasa-budget-process
t
While the IASA sets a budget for the IETF's
administrative needs, its
So I have add (in my editing buffer)
t
The IAOC shall establish and publish rules to
handle conflict of interest situations.
/t
In the context it looks as folllows:
t
The IAOC decides
I have seen some discussion on this but I have not seen a consensus
call by Harald. In fact I think Harald said that most of the
issues on finances and reserves still need more discussion.
SO I have not made a change yet.
I know we DO want something about GAAP in the document,
that seems pretty
Bert sez:
As a result of the discussion I have updated the text
and it currently looks as follows in my edit buffer:
section title=IASA Budget Process anchor=iasa-budget-process
t
While the IASA sets a budget for the IETF's
Bert quotes lynn and then says
Maybe replace the last two sentences with some variation of Access
to these reserves would expect to follow normal IAOC and ISOC
approval processes for any budget overruns.
I believe that the current text was quite extensively discussed in the
past.
--On Thursday, 23 December, 2004 11:30 +0100 Harald Tveit
Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ticket #733 questions whether it's right to state a principle
that things should be outsourced:
In principle, IETF administrative functions should be
outsourced.
I would remove this sentence.
Hi John -
Your note seems like an outlier. In particular, it takes a really
*strong* stance on protecting people from each other because
people *will* act badly. For example, the way I read your
note, the IESG will micromanage and the IASA/IAD will order
bagels flown in daily from New York.
I like John's formulation reason
In principle, IETF administrative functions should be
outsourced. Decisions to perform specific functions
in-house should be explicitly justified by the IAOC
and restricted to the minimum staff required, with these
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
--On Thursday, 23 December, 2004 09:42 -0800 Carl Malamud
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi John -
Your note seems like an outlier. In particular, it takes a
really *strong* stance on protecting people from each other
because people *will* act badly. For example, the way I read
your note,
Scoot, I believe that we have also resolved that issue
implicitly by resolving issue749. Do you agree?
Bert
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Scoot, I believe that we have also resolved that issue
implicitly by resolving issue749. Do you agree?
not being someone who memorizes issue numbers I had to look these up
but I think you are correct
Scott
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
At 04:56 PM 12/23/04 +0100, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
Maybe we should merge the 2 issues into one?
sure
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-singer-font-mime-00.txt
This was posted a while back and hasn't received much comment. I
suspect that it is not so much the quality of the writing as the fact
that many haven't noticed it...
It proposes registering a top-level font/ MIME type for font
Hi John -
(i) the IESG, or the IESG's leadership, is likely to micromanage
because it has tended to micromanage, or try to do so, many of
the things it has touched in the last several years -- the
secretariat, the content of various documents down to the
editorial level, the RFC Editor, and
--On Thursday, 23 December, 2004 13:31 -0800 Carl Malamud
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi John -
(i) the IESG, or the IESG's leadership, is likely to
micromanage because it has tended to micromanage, or try to
do so, many of the things it has touched in the last several
years -- the
Dave,
The third paragraph of your introduction starts --but only
starts-- to answer the obvious questions of why not use
application/ ? and why do you need a top-level type?
Assuming we accept your explanation for the first, it seems to
me that the second is still a little dicey. You've defined
Dave,
The third paragraph of your introduction starts --but only
starts-- to answer the obvious questions of why not use
application/ ? and why do you need a top-level type?
Assuming we accept your explanation for the first, it seems to
me that the second is still a little dicey. You've defined
on 2004-12-23 9:02 pm Fred Baker said the following:
At 04:56 PM 12/23/04 +0100, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
Maybe we should merge the 2 issues into one?
sure
I've merged issue #755 with issue #740 in the issue tracker.
Henrik
___
Ietf
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
John C Klensin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--On Thursday, 23 December, 2004 13:31 -0800 Carl Malamud
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[John Klensin wrote:]
(i) the IESG, or the IESG's leadership, is likely to
micromanage because it has tended to micromanage, or try to
do so, many of the things it has
On 23 dec 2004, at 20.07, John Leslie wrote:
I'm not so much worried about IESG actually _appealing_ the
decision on where to get bagels as I am about language which seems
to encourage anyone who doesn't like the bagels to _ask_ the IESG
to appeal it.
I don't understand why it is that the IESG
Hi John -
Your note seems like an outlier. In particular, it takes a really
*strong* stance on protecting people from each other because
people *will* act badly. For example, the way I read your
note, the IESG will micromanage and the IASA/IAD will order
bagels flown in daily from New York.
The IESG has received a request from the Robust Header Compression WG to
consider the following document:
- 'RObust Header Compression (ROHC):Context Replication for ROHC Profiles '
draft-ietf-rohc-context-replication-06.txt as a Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'E.164 Number Mapping for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol '
draft-ietf-enum-epp-e164-08.txt as a Proposed Standard
This document is the product of the Telephone Number Mapping Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Allison Mankin and
A modified charter has been submitted for the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (manet)
working group in the Routing Area of the IETF. The IESG has not made any
determination as yet. The following description was submitted, and is
provided for informational purposes only. Please send your comments to
the
A new IETF working group has been proposed in the Routing Area. The IESG
has not made any determination as yet. The following description was
submitted, and is provided for informational purposes only. Please send
your comments to the IESG mailing list (iesg@ietf.org) by December 30th.
+++
46 matches
Mail list logo
