On 22/07/2012 17:26, Melinda Shore wrote:
On 7/22/12 3:17 AM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
IF x, THEN y:
ELSE:
ELSE IF:
Please send your comments or advise, thanking you,
Yes: you might try to explain what problem you think you're
solving.
Melinda
Preferable with a list of RFC text
On Jul 20, 2012, at 18:36 , Joel jaeggli wrote:
On 7/20/12 09:06 , IETF Administrative Director wrote:
The IAOC is seeking community feedback on a proposed date change for IETF 95
scheduled for March 2016.
Currently IETF 95 is scheduled for 27 March to 1 April 2016. 27 March is
Easter.
On 2012-07-23 00:33, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Hi all,
I'd like to check that some recent minor changes to this
document [1] don't cause technical or process-grief.
The version [2] of the oauth bearer draft that underwent
IETF LC and IESG evaluation had a normative dependency
on the httpbis wg's
On 20/07/2012 18:06, IETF Administrative Director wrote:
The IAOC is seeking community feedback on a proposed date change for IETF 95
scheduled for March 2016.
Currently IETF 95 is scheduled for 27 March to 1 April 2016. 27 March is
Easter.
The IAOC is proposing IETF 95 be rescheduled
On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 10:08 +0200, Henk Uijterwaal wrote:
On 20/07/2012 18:06, IETF Administrative Director wrote:
The IAOC is seeking community feedback on a proposed date change for IETF 95
scheduled for March 2016.
Currently IETF 95 is scheduled for 27 March to 1 April 2016. 27
Hi Stewart,
Usually the (IF x, THEN y) means if x happens then y is a MUST, so I
don't see the important reflection of a MUST in many documentation
when using *if*. That is why I prefer to find requirements more easily
while skimming any IETF document, the MUST, SHOULD, and IF, these are
Hiya,
On 07/23/2012 08:56 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
On 2012-07-23 00:33, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Hi all,
I'd like to check that some recent minor changes to this
document [1] don't cause technical or process-grief.
The version [2] of the oauth bearer draft that underwent
IETF LC and IESG
comments in line
I'd encourage you to not try change 2119.
thanks for your comment
Instead, add whatever new definitions you feel
you need to your own draft that addresses some
technical, and not process, topic.
I agree that I will need to add to the technical draft for now.
If people
On Jul 23, 2012, at 14:28, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote:
you need to take into account at least both the Friday and Monday in some
countries.
+1
In much of Europe, the Easter holidays run from Good Friday to Easter Monday,
and exhibit
-- strong travel activity
-- zero to reduced opening times
On Jul 23, 2012, at 4:08 AM, Henk Uijterwaal wrote:
On 20/07/2012 18:06, IETF Administrative Director wrote:
The IAOC is seeking community feedback on a proposed date change for IETF 95
scheduled for March 2016.
Currently IETF 95 is scheduled for 27 March to 1 April 2016. 27 March is
+1 Excellent idea in principle ..IMHO just a matter of working out details.
-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Bradner, Scott
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 10:17 AM
To: Scott Brim
Cc: wgcha...@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org;
On 7/23/2012 4:26 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
I'd encourage you to not try change 2119.
Instead, add whatever new definitions you feel
you need to your own draft that addresses some
technical, and not process, topic.
If people find your new definitions useful they'll
say and if enough of that
As a working assumption let's say at least 750 USD or Euros per hour to
calculate cost recovery.
-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of John
C Klensin
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 10:40 AM
To: IETF Administrative Director
Cc:
I did it once - it took 2 or 3 hours *it was quite a while back and I do not
remember)
there were no significant expenses - the depo was in Boston my only
expense was a few hours parking - the depo was done in the office of the
law firm that was providing the IETF with pro-bono legal services
I did not do them any favor - I did the IETF a favor (as the then ISOC VP for
Standards)
Scott
On Jul 22, 2012, at 4:43 PM, John R Levine wrote:
I did it once - it took 2 or 3 hours *it was quite a while back and I do not
remember)
there were no significant expenses - the depo was in
Let's forget the religious discussion that seems to have broken out as a result
of this.
While Easter may be a major Christian festival, I don't believe the issue is
such (I can think of no reasons why Christians would have a doctrinal reason
other than those that apply to any other Sunday and
At 07:28 AM 7/23/2012, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote:
Let's forget the religious discussion that seems to have broken out
as a result of this.
While Easter may be a major Christian festival, I don't believe the
issue is such (I can think of no reasons why Christians would have a
doctrinal
No objection. Thank you for asking.
Just as with any project that you don't really want to take on, make
sure the price is high enough that you're willing to do it should
someone be foolish enough to pay the asking price.
Also consider adding an automatic fee escalation clause (e.g. permit
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
I don't understand why this issue is coming up.
Maybe you don't know, IETF 84 falls in the month of Ramadan for
Muslims and nobody asked to change it?
I think focusing on the religious roots of the holiday is misguided.
The question is what effect
John Levine wrote:
[ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ]
You're not going to find cool temperatures again in July or August
unless you go as far south as Argentina or New Zealand.
Not only is there life north of the 60th parallel (N), there are
even hotels and restaurants and
The IESG has received a request from the Application Bridging for
Federated Access Beyond web WG (abfab) to consider the following
document:
- 'Application Bridging for Federated Access Beyond web (ABFAB) Use
Cases'
draft-ietf-abfab-usecases-03.txt as Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make a
The IAB is working on
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-privacy-considerations 'Privacy
Considerations for Internet Protocols'. In order to better understand the
implementation status of IPv6 privacy mechanisms in operating system stacks,
those familiar with OS IPv6 implementations are asked
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'The Atom deleted-entry Element'
(draft-snell-atompub-tombstones-18.txt) as Proposed Standard
This document has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an
IETF Working Group.
The IESG contact person is Barry Leiba.
A URL of this
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'An IETF URN Sub-Namespace for OAuth'
(draft-ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns-06.txt) as Informational RFC
This document is the product of the Web Authorization Protocol Working
Group.
The IESG contact persons are Stephen Farrell and Sean Turner.
A URL of
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Indicating Email Handling States in Trace Fields'
(draft-ietf-appsawg-received-state-04.txt) as Proposed Standard
This document is the product of the Applications Area Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Barry Leiba and Pete Resnick.
A
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Publishing the Tao of the IETF as a Web Page'
(draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-04.txt) as Informational RFC
This document has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an
IETF Working Group.
The IESG contact person is Russ Housley.
A
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Default Address Selection for Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6)'
(draft-ietf-6man-rfc3484bis-06.txt) as Proposed Standard
This document is the product of the IPv6 Maintenance Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Brian Haberman and Ralph
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'DNS Security (DNSSEC) DNSKEY Algorithm IANA Registry Updates'
(draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-registry-update-03.txt) as Proposed Standard
This document is the product of the DNS Extensions Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Ralph Droms and
28 matches
Mail list logo
