On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the Reliable Multicast Transport WG
(rmt) to consider the following document:
- 'Multicast Negative-Acknowledgment (NACK) Building Blocks '
draft-ietf-rmt-bb-norm-revised-04.txt as a Proposed Standard
The IESG plans
Exactly .. I don't see the problem. I've not seen any evidence of abuse.
IMHO if the procedure is not broken why are we trying to fix it?
Why is the IETF so continuingly dragged about in these, frankly trivial,
process issues?
I won't repeat what others have said about the presence or
Coming to consensus on this is going to be messy, as it was in DRUMS,
which is what landed us with no comment in the document. To wit:
On 4/4/08 at 5:47 PM -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
There are two ways to interpret the X- and I think they yield
different answers about what should be done.
Pete Resnick wrote:
(1) Partially restore the 822 text, stressing private use, rather
than experiental.
I don't think we'll be able to do this; see (3) below.
...
(3) Encourage X-headers for strictly private use, i.e., they SHOULD
NOT be used in any context in which interchange or
+1 from me.
The role of the Trust Chair used to be pretty lightweight: either it
still is, and Harald's advice is sound (get clerical help), or it
no longer is, and a more detailed explanation of the experienced change
would be helpful to the community being asked for comment.
Leslie.
--On
The IAOC and the IETF Trust have different focus. The idea behind
the separate chair is to make sure that someone is paying attention
to the items that need to be handled by each body in a timely
manner. It is simply a mechanism to help ensure that noting is
falling between the cracks.
Russ
On Apr 3, 2008, at 1:54 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
Probably the Trust and/or IAOC procedures or charter should be
modified so that, in the event of the demise of the IAOC, the Trust
falls firmly under direct IETF control (unless the IETF itself
ceases to exist).
The concept makes sense
Fred Baker wrote:
On Apr 3, 2008, at 1:54 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
Probably the Trust and/or IAOC procedures or charter should be
modified so that, in the event of the demise of the IAOC, the Trust
falls firmly under direct IETF control (unless the IETF itself
ceases to exist).
--On Monday, 07 April, 2008 16:55 -0400 Ray Pelletier
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fred Baker wrote:
On Apr 3, 2008, at 1:54 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
Probably the Trust and/or IAOC procedures or charter should
be modified so that, in the event of the demise of the
IAOC, the Trust
John C Klensin wrote:
--On Monday, 07 April, 2008 16:55 -0400 Ray Pelletier
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fred Baker wrote:
On Apr 3, 2008, at 1:54 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
Probably the Trust and/or IAOC procedures or charter should
be modified so that, in the event of the
The IESG has received a request from the Transport Area Working Group WG
(tsvwg) to consider the following document:
- 'User-Defined Errors for RSVP '
draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-user-error-spec-06.txt as a Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'IPv6 Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect Devices '
draft-ietf-bmwg-ipv6-meth-05.txt as an Informational RFC
This document is the product of the Benchmarking Methodology Working
Group.
The IESG contact persons are Ron Bonica and
The IAOC is pleased to announce that the Internet Society has executed a
Secretariat Services Agreement with Association Management Solutions LLC.
AMS will provide meetings, clerical and IT services for the IETF. The two
year contract began on 1 February 2008 and provides for two one-year
13 matches
Mail list logo
