On 07/11/2012 01:23, Randy Bush wrote:
[ my last post on this ]
But my objective in the question what might be late was whether IETF
may have defined late somewhere
we are [supposed to be] professionals of *integrity*. discussion of how
far the submarine should be allowed to run before
Hi Tom,
Many thanks for your comments!
Please see my reply inline with [Mach]
Best regards,
Mach
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] on behalf of t.p.
[daedu...@btconnect.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2012 2:05
To: ietf@ietf.org
--On Wednesday, 07 November, 2012 10:23 +0900 Randy Bush
ra...@psg.com wrote:
[ my last post on this ]
But my objective in the question what might be late was
whether IETF may have defined late somewhere
we are [supposed to be] professionals of *integrity*.
discussion of how far the
On 11/7/2012 7:10 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 07/11/2012 01:23, Randy Bush wrote:
we are [supposed to be] professionals of *integrity*. discussion of how
far the submarine should be allowed to run before it surfaces are the
primrose path. as professionals of integrity, we should not
On 11.7.2012 07:10 , Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 07/11/2012 01:23, Randy Bush wrote:
[ my last post on this ]
But my objective in the question what might be late was whether IETF
may have defined late somewhere
we are [supposed to be] professionals of
Stephan Wenger st...@stewe.org wrote:
...
It is, in most cases, not to the advantage of a rightholder to disclose
a patent unless he is undeniably obligated to do so...
This is a really strange statement, at first blush.
So I ask Stephan to clarify what he meant to say (before I react
Olafur,
this is to acknowledge receipt of your petition.
I also inform the IETF community that I will appoint a Recall Committee Chair
shortly.
Regards,
Lynn St.Amour
Internet Society President CEO
On Nov 6, 2012, at 4:56 PM, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote:
Lynn,
As one of the original
On 11.7.2012 09:57 , John Leslie j...@jlc.net wrote:
Stephan Wenger st...@stewe.org wrote:
...
It is, in most cases, not to the advantage of a rightholder to disclose
a patent unless he is undeniably obligated to do so...
This is a really strange statement, at first blush.
So I ask
On 11/7/2012 5:33 AM, Stephan Wenger wrote:
On 11.7.2012 07:10 , Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 07/11/2012 01:23, Randy Bush wrote:
[ my last post on this ]
But my objective in the question what might be late was whether IETF
may have defined late somewhere
we are
On 11/7/2012 1:11 PM, t.p. wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Russ Housley hous...@vigilsec.com
To: Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com
Cc: IETF ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 5:43 PM
Brian:
Jorge has reviewed this text. He says that the current text and this
Stephan Wenger st...@stewe.org wrote:
...
Clearer?
Much clearer. Thank you!
On 11.7.2012 09:57 , John Leslie j...@jlc.net wrote:
Stephan Wenger st...@stewe.org wrote:
...
It is, in most cases, not to the advantage of a rightholder to disclose
a patent unless he is undeniably obligated
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 6782
Title: Wireline Incremental IPv6
Author: V. Kuarsingh, Ed.,
L. Howard
Status: Informational
Stream: IETF
Date:
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 6785
Title: Support for Internet Message Access
Protocol (IMAP) Events in Sieve
Author: B. Leiba
Status: Standards Track
Stream: IETF
The IESG has received a request from the IMAP MOVE extension WG
(imapmove) to consider the following document:
- 'The IMAP Move Extension'
draft-ietf-imapmove-command-02.txt as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this
14 matches
Mail list logo
