At 20:42 23-05-2013, Jorge Amodio wrote:
Taking the IETF meeting to Buenos Aires is not a bad idea, but when
the meeting is over the root problem will still be there.
Jari Arkko is the Chair of the IETF. He asked the following
questions (
Vinayak,
Maybe several co-located meetings or having people from the IETF speak at
universities and regional ISOC chapters around the meeting might help. Also
showcasing the good work done by their Latin American peers might help as
well.
Good ideas. Thanks.
Jari
In the interests of moving the document forward more briskly, here are my
comments as responsible AD.
Thanks,
Adrian
---
I know it is not the intent of this document to propose solutions or
mitigations to any of the threats described. However, I think two things
would be useful:
1. Please add
On 5/24/13 3:05 AM, SM wrote:
Just meeting in some place does not bring too many new participants,
at least not in a lasting manner. But combined with some other actions,
this may be possible. Are there specific companies or research teams
that
we could reach out to, and who
The == The IAOC bob.hin...@gmail.com writes:
The The venues are in Buenos Aires. They meet our requirements for the
meeting
The space, networking, nearby restaurants and bars, hotel room rates in
the mid $200
The dollar range, nearby alternate hotels at a broad range of prices,
Where are you flying from?
There are direct flights from Miami, Dallas, Toronto, Washington and
other hubs to Buenos Aires.
Regards,
as
On 5/24/13 11:12 AM, Michael Richardson wrote:
The == The IAOC bob.hin...@gmail.com writes:
The The venues are in Buenos Aires.
Also, there are several events in each country that can be used to
disseminate the actions of IETF. In Brazil, for example, the events
linked to universities and research centers are promoted by the
Brazilian Computer Society (a lot of). Other less formal events but with
participation of people
Hello,
Just a small comment:
On 5/23/13, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net wrote:
For what it is worth, I wanted to provide my perspective on this. I of
course believe that it is important that the IETF reaches out to an even
{...}
Just meeting in some place does not bring too many new
Hi Juliao,
At 18:34 23-05-2013, Juliao Braga wrote:
I stare at the map of where the IETF meetings occurred
(http://ws.org.br/index.php/IETF_Meetings) and wondering if the fact of
bringing some of the meetings to below the Equator could lead to
increase people participation.
That's a nice map.
Hi. That's great news!
I think that a meeting in Buenos Aires will foster the participation in
our region. Including Brazilian participation. Probably it will be a
great opportunity for a lot of people to participate for the first time,
and come to know the process, and become involved.
It is
Speaking as an IETF participator, it is good for IETF diversity. Many people
will also enjoy to visit a new places with curious. Actually, Buenos Aires
disappointed me when I found it was so similar to European cities.
Speaking as an Asian, last time I flight to Buenos Aires took me more than
I used Expedia to price flights for me on March 2014:
- Buenos Aires: $1401 (21h each way)
- London (where the meeting actually happens): $413 (7h each way. Direct costs
a bit more)
- Vancouver: $1217 (24 h each way? $1288 with a more reasonable 16h)
- Honululu: $1535 (28h each way)
-
On 05/23/2013 09:38 PM, Antonio M. Moreiras wrote:
Hi. That's great news!
I think that a meeting in Buenos Aires will foster the participation in
our region. Including Brazilian participation. Probably it will be a
great opportunity for a lot of people to participate for the first time,
On Fri, 24 May 2013, Stephen Farrell wrote:
There is no need to wait for a nearby meeting. I'd say starting to
participate via email makes such a meeting far more likely if
participants turn up and do good technical work.
It's my experience that non-native english speakers are more
For Americans, is it much more expensive than a trip to Prague?
I just happen to be looking at flights for berlin at the moment. BA is
pretty much the same +-$1600 if I'm willing to take an extra hop, closer
to $2K for one hop.
I generally find going to Europe in the summer to be pretty
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.sewrote:
It's my experience that non-native english speakers are more comfortable
exchanging text than speaking. I've met several people who write excellent
english but who it's difficult to communicate with verbally.
and in
On 5/24/13 8:07 AM, Lou Berger wrote:
I personally am a big fan for going to uninteresting locations in their
off season. Although, perhaps I'm alone in liking Minneapolis in the
winter as an IETF destination...
No, not alone.
At any rate I think that the core questions about participation
- Original Message -
From: Lou Berger lber...@labn.net
To: Yoav Nir y...@checkpoint.com
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 5:07 PM
Subject: Re: IETF Meeting in South America
For Americans, is it much more expensive than a trip to Prague?
I just happen to be looking at
On May 24, 2013, at 12:07 PM, Lou Berger lber...@labn.net wrote:
I personally am a big fan for going to uninteresting locations in their
off season. Although, perhaps I'm alone in liking Minneapolis in the
winter as an IETF destination...
You are not. Although Vancouver seems to have taken
I have been lurking IETF for many years, but it was only after I went
to my first meeting that I really understood how the IETF worked and how
to really participate.
After that meeting I started to send comments, read drafts, writing
some initial stuff and arguing. Before that
On 5/24/13 9:31 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
You are not. Although Vancouver seems to have taken over for Minneapolis.
Feh. There is no winter in Vancouver. On the other hand there are
salmon and steelhead.
Melinda
While it's unlikely that I would be able to attend, I think it's an
excellent idea for reasons already better stated by others, and BA is a
very nice city.
The only suggestion I might add that I haven't seen mentioned yet (and
pardon me if I missed it) would be to perhaps schedule the meeting
On 5/24/13 10:43 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
While it's unlikely that I would be able to attend, I think it's an
excellent idea for reasons already better stated by others, and BA is
a very nice city.
The only suggestion I might add that I haven't seen mentioned yet (and
pardon me if I missed it)
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:03 PM, joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
On 5/24/13 10:43 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
While it's unlikely that I would be able to attend, I think it's an
excellent idea for reasons already better stated by others, and BA is a
very nice city.
The only suggestion I
Depending on how the IETF in BA is scheduled, it may be possible or not
to make it before or after of a regional meeting such as LACNIC, LACTLD
or LACNOG.
I guess the best bet is for the third meeting of the year (IETF is
around the beginning of November, LACNOG/LACNIC are around
At 05:25 PM 5/23/2013, Jari Arkko wrote:
For what it is worth, I wanted to provide my perspective on this. I
of course believe that it is important that the IETF reaches out to
an even more international participation than it already has. This
is first of all because we really need the views
On 5/24/13 11:05 AM, Richard Barnes wrote:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:03 PM, joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com
mailto:joe...@bogus.com wrote:
On 5/24/13 10:43 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
While it's unlikely that I would be able to attend, I think
it's an excellent idea for reasons
On 05/24/2013 11:21 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
The consistent feedback regarding non-conflict as long as I been
involved in this tends to indicate otherwise. 18-months to 2 years seems
much more reasonable to me personally.
Joel,
You're making several fundamental mistakes in your thinking.
On 5/24/13 11:24 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
On 05/24/2013 11:21 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
The consistent feedback regarding non-conflict as long as I been
involved in this tends to indicate otherwise. 18-months to 2 years seems
much more reasonable to me personally.
Joel,
You're making several
On 05/24/2013 11:29 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
probably because I've been involved in the planning loop since 44.
... and you're also involved in planning for LACNIC, LACTLD, LACNOG, and
every other regional organization in Latin America that might be
interested in running their meeting before
On 5/24/13 11:37 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
On 05/24/2013 11:29 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
probably because I've been involved in the planning loop since 44.
... and you're also involved in planning for LACNIC, LACTLD, LACNOG,
and every other regional organization in Latin America that might be
Hi Stephen,
Good answers! Now we know about what we are talking. Thank you.
My comments in the text:
Em 24/05/2013 16:19, Stephen Farrell escreveu:
In my mind at least there's a 0-th level requirement
that comes before these:
0. Make the Internet better by getting more geographically
Joel,
This isn't 100% true. While our dates are not fungible, we could
*consider* a date move, say +/- a week *if* this would give us
availability in a certain location. This would of course be the
*exception* and not the rule (which you have correct), but *if* we
found that, say, moving
Carnival is usually around March (I think it moves around being linked to
Easter like Mardi Gras). I priced flights for November and July from Northern
California and it looks like there would be option at less than my travel to
Berlin (and about 2 to 3 times travel to East Coast North
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:04 PM, Arturo Servin arturo.ser...@gmail.comwrote:
I have been lurking IETF for many years, but it was only after I
went
to my first meeting that I really understood how the IETF worked and how
to really participate.
After that meeting I started
Feh. There is no winter in Vancouver. On the other hand there are
salmon and steelhead.
I distinctly remember a meeting in Vancouver where certain attendees
were complaining about the winter weather, with temperatures plunging
below zero* and snow drifting 1 to 2*.
The specific complaint was
My question is about whether we would be there during the peak season,
and when exactly is that season?
I gather you're in Ottawa. Here's Air Canada's calendar rules for
their lowest fare to EZE:
ORIGINATING CANADA -
PERMITTED 01JAN THROUGH 08JUL OR 06AUG THROUGH 16SEP
OR 01OCT
A new IETF non-working group email list has been created.
List address: 6...@ietf.org
Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lo/
To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
Purpose: Since it was set up in 2005, the 6LoWPAN WG has created specifications
for building IPv6
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Framework for Loop-free convergence using oFIB'
(draft-ietf-rtgwg-ordered-fib-12.txt) as Informational RFC
This document is the product of the Routing Area Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Adrian Farrel and Stewart Bryant.
A URL of
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'A Framework for IP and MPLS Fast Reroute Using Not-via Addresses'
(draft-ietf-rtgwg-ipfrr-notvia-addresses-11.txt) as Informational RFC
This document is the product of the Routing Area Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Adrian Farrel
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
BCP 183
RFC 6963
Title: A Uniform Resource Name (URN)
Namespace for Examples
Author: P. Saint-Andre
Status: Best Current Practice
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 6933
Title: Entity MIB (Version 4)
Author: A. Bierman, D. Romascanu,
J. Quittek, M. Chandramouli
Status: Standards Track
Stream: IETF
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 6958
Title: RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended
Report (XR) Block for Burst/Gap Loss
Metric Reporting
Author: A. Clark, S. Zhang,
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 6952
Title: Analysis of BGP, LDP, PCEP,
and MSDP Issues According to the
Keying and Authentication for Routing Protocols
(KARP)
The IESG has received a request from the Path Computation Element WG
(pce) to consider the following document:
- 'Requirements for GMPLS applications of PCE'
draft-ietf-pce-gmpls-aps-req-07.txt as Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final
45 matches
Mail list logo
