--On 3. februar 2005 00:06 +0100 JFC (Jefsey) Morfin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yet the request that the following text is added in Part 4 has been
objected by you and discussed with others, on the list and off list. The
carefull process of deliberation is not completed, and has not lead to a
I continue to remain concerned that the BCP is not flexible enough to allow
the IAOC to assume administrative responsibilities for acting as a trustee
for IETF-owned IP. There needs to be a specific task added to the IAOC
responsibilities for this purpose. Specifically, the following words
Hi, Tony,
It is long past time to get over any thoughts about reclaiming IPv4
space.
It will never happen. No organization is going to give up any they
have
until we are well past the point where anyone cares about getting
more.
IPv4 has reached the point of success/failure and is a dead end
Bob,
neither your comment nor Patrice's comment reassure my stated concern that
designating the IAOC as an entity that would be taking legal responsibility
separate from ISOC would expose its members to personal liability.
I believe that letting the BCP task the IASA with this responsibility
To emphasize something that Harald said -- my read of the discussion
on this list is that the matter requires more discussion. It also
requires more attention to detail than should go into the BCP.
For example, from the discussion on the list, it's pretty clear
that at least some people question
This also calls for a serious review of the related liabilities. If these
rights are challenged who is going to pay to sustain the action and the
possible damages? Since IASA is not incorporated will the IAOC Members, the
ISOC be liable? The ISOC internal relations with their national Chapters
draft-ietf-iasa-bcp-06.txt
Structure of the IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA) (BCP)
COMMENT
Section 4 includes a discussion of the process for selection of
IAOC members. There is not a paragraph that covers the member
appointed by the ISOC Board of Trustees. However, the guidance
On Thursday, February 03, 2005 12:54:29 AM -0500 stanislav shalunov
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jeffrey Hutzelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[..T]he _common_ convention is to use a backslash followed by the
value of the octet as an unsigned integer represented by exactly
three _octal_ digits. This
At 10:53 AM 2/3/2005, Stastny Richard wrote:
Related to the current discussion at the enum list I am not sure if
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-vpim-routing-08.txt
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-vpim-routing-08.txt
is ready for last call. It defines enumservices
http://wgig.org/docs/WP-techstand.pdf
This document is interesting and documents well my positions. Except the
need for the user of an organized comprehensive reference center. You will
note the mention of possible national influences. This is what the IASA
internationalization related few
http://www.startribune.com/stories/368/5217727.html
--
Clint (JOATMON) Chaplin
Wireless Security Technologist
Wireless Standards Lead
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Jeffrey Hutzelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
ISO/IEC 9899:1990 section 6.1.3.4 has this to say:
This differs from my account in not requiring the first octal digit
after backslash to be zero. Thank you for correcting that; \61,
indeed, works as 1 in C. (Thus, there are enough digits to
Bob, I appreciate your interest in working with the IETF to establish
the IASA. I also appreciate your interest in improving the BCP.
I have been disappointed that you have been sending revised comments
on the IPR issue over the last two weeks. However you have not been
engaging in a discussion
Internet-draft announcements, as they are currently generated, include
a MIME-based mechanism to request internet-drafts via email. Do you
use this feature? If you do, could you please let me know?
Background: the IETF Tools team is working on a draft,
draft-ietf-tools-notification-03.txt, that
Hi, Bob. It was pointed out to me privately that my message could be
misinterpreted and that it might come across as if I'm not interested
in listening to and evaluating proposals for change. That's certainly
not my intent so let me take a step back and explain what I was trying
to do.
I
Date:03 Feb 2005 00:54:29 -0500
From:stanislav shalunov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is totally irrelevant to the doc in question, but ...
| Actually, the convention used in C and Perl is to use \0, followed by
| zero, one, or two octal
The IESG has received a request from the Enhancements to Internet email to
support diverse service environments WG to consider the following document:
- 'Server To Server Notification Protocol Requirements '
draft-ietf-lemonade-notify-s2s-00.txt as a Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make
The IESG has received a request from the Voice Profile for Internet Mail WG to
consider the following documents:
- 'Voice Messaging Directory Service '
draft-ietf-vpim-vpimdir-09.txt as a Proposed Standard
- 'Voice Message Routing Service '
draft-ietf-vpim-routing-08.txt as a Proposed
18 matches
Mail list logo
