On 5/27/2013 11:38 PM, Christian O'Flaherty wrote:
I would like to follow up on this proposal. Having a meeting in South
America scheduled two or three years in advance will let us engage
local organisations and individuals on a project. We did several
activities in the region trying to
while i appreciate joe's listening to my other comments on the draft, i
still strongly object to publication of this draft as an rfc for the
reasons made very clear in the sec cons. please read the summary
section of rfc 2804.
While the RFC should not be materially misleading, I don't
Hi Donald,
At 21:09 27-05-2013, Donald Eastlake wrote:
While the RFC should not be materially misleading, I don't think there
is a requirement for Informational RFCs to guarantee any particular
level or security or privacy.
Yes. In my opinion a best effort is preferable or else the Security
Your experience and ideas on how to start-out are useful.
On 27 May 2013 16:13, Yoav Nir y...@checkpoint.com wrote:
LCD?
Anyway, What I found most useful when I was starting out 9 years ago, was
to look over the list of areas and working groups (
http://tools.ietf.org/area/ ) and find out
Hi,
Dave Crocker and I have this little draft [1] discussing the process and
considerations for creating formal working group drafts that are targeted for
publication.
We believe that this may help clarify some of the issues and concerns
associated with this part of the process. We are
Sorry, I meant LCD.
Nthabiseng Pule
On 27 May 2013, at 5:48 PM, John R Levine jo...@taugh.com wrote:
On Mon, 27 May 2013, Yoav Nir wrote:
LCD?
LDC, Less Developed Country, what used to be called the third world, now that
the second has been bought by the first.
Regards,
John
On 2013-05-28, at 3:38, SM s...@resistor.net wrote:
In theory the IETF does not publish RFCs to suit the regulations of one
country (see use-case in draft-jabley-dnsext-eui48-eui64-rrtypes-04). In
practice, the IETF has published a RFC to suit the requirements (it was a
voluntary measure
Hi,
Good work. Here are a few thoughts after a first reading.
- We seem not to have a definition of what a WG I-D is, although we know how to
recognize a WG I-D because of the naming convention. So, if I am not mistaken
the phrase
Working Group drafts are documents that are subject to IETF
Nicely written, largely stating what might be obvious for many, but
still nice to see it in black and white.
A few comments/suggestions:
1) Section 3. Authors/Editors
I suggest that you suggest that WG (co)chair(s) add an editor that is
unrelated to the
--On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 15:42 +0900 Randy Bush
ra...@psg.com wrote:
...
While the RFC should not be materially misleading, I don't
think there is a requirement for Informational RFCs to
guarantee any particular level or security or privacy.
that the draft now tries to slide by as info
What is at issue, IMO, is whether the Internet is better off
having a couple of RRTYPEs around with no documentation or
having them documented.
there are two solutions to this
randy
Hi,
Actually it's not industry that I hear complaining, but individuals.
Eliot
On 5/27/13 10:08 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:
Melinda wrote:
The industry sector bias in IETF participation is
possibly compounding the regional bias.
Yes.
Jari
Riiight. That is why one never has to attend an IETF meeting in person to serve
on NOMCOM, one does not need travel support from one's employer to be on the
IESG, and why people who never come to IETF meetings are the rule and not the
exception with respect to getting documents adopted and
On May 28, 2013, at 8:46 AM, Eric Burger ebur...@standardstrack.com wrote:
Riiight. That is why one never has to attend an IETF meeting in person to
serve on NOMCOM, one does not need travel support from one's employer to be
on the IESG, and why people who never come to IETF meetings are the
Considering how long and painful the retrofit (RFC 4412) for SIP was,
yes, I think it is important to plan for it early.
Janet
.
ietf-boun...@ietf.org wrote on 05/25/2013 03:10:07 AM:
From: Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net
To: James Polk jmp...@cisco.com
Cc: ietf@ietf.org list ietf@ietf.org
Dear IETF Managers,
My name is Rogério Mariano and I`m a member of the Internet Society (Global
Member # 339380) and a student of Internet Governance Programme (IGCBP)
DiploFoundation and Consultant for the definition and operation of the
Service Provider direction related to the technical
I support to try the new meeting sites such as South America or Africa.
Jiankang Yao
From: Abdussalam Baryun
Date: 2013-05-27 07:38
To: SM
CC: ietf; dcrocker
Subject: Re: More participation from under-represented regions (was: IETF
Meeting in South America)
I support to add the new region,
Hi,
I think those comments have been addressed/answered in my previous reply
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg15274.html
I didn't see the support of your comments from other WG participants.
best
Jiazi
2013/5/27 Abdussalam Baryun abdussalambar...@gmail.com
Reply to
Rather than saying someone should do this on the list, you could, you know,
do the work.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
Please excuse my clumbsy thums.
On 2013-05-27, at 9:31, Abdussalam Baryun abdussalambar...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/27/13, Eggert, Lars l...@netapp.com wrote:
On May 27, 2013, at
The IETF has a big problem, IMHO, in that effective participation really does
currently seem to require meeting attendance. There's a reason
that nomcom members have to show up—if they didn't, they wouldn't be part of
the actual culture of IETF, because so much IETF culture is
bound up
On 2013-05-28 13:09, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
Hi,
Good work. Here are a few thoughts after a first reading.
- We seem not to have a definition of what a WG I-D is,
although we know how to recognize a WG I-D because of the naming
convention. So, if I am not mistaken the phrase
Working
It is difficult to read, because I am expecting a process and find
something else,
I started to read, but got confused (stoped reading), why you are titling
it as creating WG-draft and mentioning the adoption into the document. I
understand that the creating first is *individual-draft* not
On 28/05/2013 15:36, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
It is difficult to read, because I am expecting a process and find
something else,
I started to read, but got confused (stoped reading), why you are
titling it as creating WG-draft and mentioning the adoption into the
document. I understand that
Adrian,
I'm fine with this draft as long as it stays informational and is
viewed as a commentary on how what we are doing in the border land
between individual and formal working group documents, i.e. this is
not an IETF process text.
Names of ID file are a bit trickier than what I get from
On 05/27/2013 07:31 AM, Juliao Braga wrote:
According to the news published for a long time in Brazilian newspapers
and magazines, Buenos Aires (a wonderful place!) would not be
recommended.
Recommended for what? And on what basis?
Cheers,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar ||
Jorge,
On 05/27/2013 08:16 AM, Jorge Amodio wrote:
I feel that is totally OT but for example we have supporters of the
current government like this one, claiming to be a writer, that if you
are able to read in Spanish or helped by a translator to read his
article, you will learn that he is
Hi, Tim,
On 05/27/2013 09:19 AM, Tim Chown wrote:
The move appears to be related to new, restrictive
regulations the Argentine government has imposed on currency exchanges.'
According to the Telegraph, 'The new regulations required anyone wanting
to change Argentine pesos into another
--On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 20:58 +0900 Randy Bush
ra...@psg.com wrote:
What is at issue, IMO, is whether the Internet is better off
having a couple of RRTYPEs around with no documentation or
having them documented.
there are two solutions to this
Probably more than two if your comment
What is at issue, IMO, is whether the Internet is better off
having a couple of RRTYPEs around with no documentation or
having them documented.
there are two solutions to this
Probably more than two if your comment indicates that you agree
that having registered RRTYPEs documented is, on
Hi Fernando,
Please, read my sentence complementary to comment:
...But who should tell us about the true cenary would be our
Argentine friends.
Regards,
Julião
Em 28/05/2013 10:36, Fernando Gont escreveu:
On 05/27/2013 07:31 AM, Juliao Braga wrote:
According to the news published for a long
On 5/28/2013 10:52 AM, Stewart Bryant wrote:
... The only
requirement is that the chairs conclude that the existence such a draft
has WG consensus.
...
Strictly speaking, I believe the only requirement for a document to be
published as a WG document is that a WG chair approves it.
I do
In reading through the draft, particularly the section on questions for
WG adoption of a draft, I did not see the questions I consider most
pertinent:
Does the WG think this is a reasonable (preferably good) basis for
starting to work collectively on the deliverable?
(Apologies if it was
there is also the not uncommon event where an idea starts as an individual idea,
moves into a WG, is rejected by the WG, becomes an individual idea, is picked up
by another WG, rejected, (lather, rinse, repeat), and then the -right- WG is
formed
and it is processed that way. In the current
On 5/28/13 8:18 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
What is at issue, IMO, is whether the Internet is better off
having a couple of RRTYPEs around with no documentation or
having them documented.
there are two solutions to this
Probably more than two if your comment indicates that you agree
that having
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 12:18:40AM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
remove the rrtypes from the registry
While it's good to see that the Internet Exemplary Taste-enForcers are
alive and well, I would have an extremely strong objection to that
approach. The DNS Extensions Working Group published an
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 12:10 AM, Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net wrote:
James:
did you know that you have a audio/video realtime interactive
communications WG churning out proposals and solutions that is *actively*
ignoring emergency communications in its entirety? No? Look at RTCweb,
On 5/28/13 6:20 AM, Christian O'Flaherty wrote:
Probably, this lack of social interaction in our region is one of
the main reasons for low participation. Most of latin american
IETFers are currently living outside the region and they engaged in
the IETF when living in the US or Europe. It's
On 5/23/13 8:02 PM, David Conrad wrote:
On May 23, 2013, at 7:44 PM, Melinda Shore melinda.sh...@gmail.com wrote:
So the question is why we aren't seeing more drafts, reviews, and
discussions from people in Central and South America,
Language?
It would seem likely when the participation is
Hi Joe,
At 03:12 28-05-2013, Joe Abley wrote:
Note that there's no suggestion that these RRTypes are required by the
CRTC. The example given was for a situation where Interop would have
been beneficial (so that cable resellers have an obvious, stable and
supported way of encoding this kind of
Julio,
I'm worried about people making statements on a random basis.
I assume that many people (IAOC and many others) have made a lot of
effort before getting to the point of formally proposing/suggesting to
have an IETF meeting in Buenos Aires. I bet much of that effort had to
do with making an
On 5/28/13 9:41 AM, SM wrote:
Hi Joe,
At 03:12 28-05-2013, Joe Abley wrote:
Note that there's no suggestion that these RRTypes are required by the
CRTC. The example given was for a situation where Interop would have
been beneficial (so that cable resellers have an obvious, stable and
supported
The bad things that happen in Argentina financially affect only
Argentinians. I'm not saying this is a good thing overall, just saying
that this isn't a problem for tourists and certainly won't be a problem
for IETFers.
Probably these financial 'issues' will even affect positively the
On 5/28/2013 10:22 AM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
In reading through the draft, particularly the section on questions for
WG adoption of a draft, I did not see the questions I consider most
pertinent:
I appreciate Dave and Adrian for producing this helpful start, and I'm
mostly comfortable with
by looking into the statistics of I-Ds and RFCs, it is strange that we get
sometimes high rate in the I-D going in IETF from some regions but the
success rate of I-Ds to become RFCs is very low (5- 50). So the only region
that is producing RFCs with high rate (about 200 per year) is North America
At 11:58 AM 5/28/2013, Ted Hardie wrote:
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 12:10 AM, Jari Arkko
mailto:jari.ar...@piuha.netjari.ar...@piuha.net wrote:
James:
did you know that you have a audio/video realtime interactive
communications WG churning out proposals and solutions that is
*actively*
Dear Fernando,
If I have to decide about a meeting in Buenos Aires based in the
information that I read in the Brazilian newspapers and magazines I
decide to no. By this reason I need to listen from Argentine people, as
you. I believe this is the right way to decide.
The choice of Buenos Aires
I would suggest we not try to sort out on this list which sorts of Internet
services are subject to American regulations.
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 2:20 PM, James Polk jmp...@cisco.com wrote:
At 11:58 AM 5/28/2013, Ted Hardie wrote:
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 12:10 AM, Jari Arkko mailto:
Dear Rogério Mariano,
You have a great deal of experience. Since the mission of the IETF is to
make the Internet better, could you point out specific problems that you
would like to work on in the IETF? When you say infrastructure and
standardization, that is very general. If there were an
On May 28, 2013, at 11:25 AM, Richard Barnes r...@ipv.sx wrote:
I would suggest we not try to sort out on this list which sorts of Internet
services are subject to American regulations.
Or those of any other jurisdiction. If jurisdiction Z comes to the IETF and
says we have declared protocol
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Melinda Shore melinda.sh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/28/13 6:20 AM, Christian O'Flaherty wrote:
Probably, this lack of social interaction in our region is one of
the main reasons for low participation. Most of latin american
IETFers are currently living outside
It would seem likely when the participation is heaviliy biased towards
equipment vendors and software tooling that the participants would be more
representative of where the concentration of the development sideo of that
work occurs.
This is true, but this is also something where active
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 11:20 AM, James Polk jmp...@cisco.com wrote:
Quoting Henning:
At least in the US, many of the WebRTC services would be considered
interconnected VoIP, so they are indeed subject to 911 obligations.
James
BTW- yeah, I know I'm picking a fight - but Jari singled this
On 28/05/2013 21:32, Adrian Farrel wrote:
Hi,
Dave Crocker and I have this little draft [1] discussing the process and
considerations for creating formal working group drafts that are targeted for
publication.
We believe that this may help clarify some of the issues and concerns
Julio,
On 05/28/2013 08:20 PM, Juliao Braga wrote:
If I have to decide about a meeting in Buenos Aires based in the
information that I read in the Brazilian newspapers and magazines I
decide to no.
Could you please provide pointers to such articles? Additionally, could
you please summarize
Hi,
I have never been a wg chair but I think that this document may be very
useful and helpful (at least it clarifies many things to me).
I have some comments:
- To me Section 2.1 (Formal Steps) looks better after 2.2 (Criteria of
Adoption).
- Section 2.2 does not set up a
Fernando,
Please, read the Brazilian newspapers and magazines.
I'm not looking for news from Argentina. I see them and / or read just
the same way that I see or read others news, always an passant.
This type of issue is not exactly my specialty or interest. But you can
see a handful of recents
Any sense of why that didn't happen with Australians after
the Adelaide meeting?
The centres for networking industry in Australia are Melbourne and Sydney, in
that order.
It's a bit like IETF 51 being held in Grimsby, not London or Cambridge.
Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood
Juliao,
I went to all this sites (besides BBC Brazil) and searched for
Argentina. There were some news about economy, the lady President, some
about the senate, commercial balance but none saying huu, scary
Argentina, do not go there.
Regards,
as
On 5/28/13 7:13 PM, Juliao Braga wrote:
On 5/28/13 11:56 AM, Christian O'Flaherty wrote:
It would seem likely when the participation is heaviliy biased towards
equipment vendors and software tooling that the participants would be more
representative of where the concentration of the development sideo of that
work occurs.
This is
Arturo,
Who said ...huu, scary Argentina, do not go there? Where? In this list?
Em 28/05/2013 20:09, Arturo Servin escreveu:
Juliao,
I went to all this sites (besides BBC Brazil) and searched for
Argentina. There were some news about economy, the lady President, some
about the
not be recommended sounds to me it sounded like huu, scary, do not
go there.
/as
On 5/27/13 2:31 AM, Juliao Braga wrote: According to the news
published for a long time in Brazilian newspapers
and magazines, Buenos Aires (a wonderful place!) would not be
recommended. But who
remove the rrtypes from the registry
While it's good to see that the Internet Exemplary Taste-enForcers are
alive and well, I would have an extremely strong objection to that
approach.
jck was trying to enumerate alternatives. he omitted one. i am not a
particular advocate of any of them,
Arturo,
I'm sorry that you interpret this way. But absolutely, I do not mean to
offend. Only expressed a point of view and said that our Argentine
friends could clarify. You can not trust the press, totally.
Anyway, I apologize if there was offense.
Best Regards,
Juliao
Em 28/05/2013 20:36,
Not taken. It was estrange to me that it were many news about how bad
Argentina is in the Brazilian press. I read frequently BBC-Brazil and
other newspapers of latin america and I haven't read such things, that
is why.
/as
On 5/28/13 8:45 PM, Juliao Braga wrote:
Arturo,
I'm
Hi Edwin,
On 5/26/13, Edwin A. Opare aeop...@gmail.com wrote:
{...}
To elicit participation from the under-represented regions, the
universities are a sure starting point, then a lot more industry-focused
awareness creation by the ISOC local Chapters.
I fully agree with you that
Just one, Alejandro, here in Brazil:
Next July, 23-26 in Maceio, Brazil will be held the 13o. CSBC (the main
annual meeting of SBC - Brazilian Computer Society. A big meeting!).
I sent an e-mail to coordinators, requesting a BoF to talk about the
IETF and ISOC Fellowships.
If they approve a
On 5/28/13 3:06 PM, l.w...@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
The centres for networking industry in Australia are Melbourne and Sydney, in
that order.
It's a bit like IETF 51 being held in Grimsby, not London or Cambridge.
Okay. So, should we be extrapolating from this to what
we can expect from
Perhaps not. Buenos Aires is also a big hub of technology in Latin
America. In addition as it was mentioned it relatively close from Sao
Paulo, Montevideo and Santiago. Also there are direct flights from other
major cities in Peru and Colombia.
Going to Buenos Aires, Sao Paulo,
I think we can expect a lot of Brazilians people in Buenos Aires.
Juliao
Em 28/05/2013 23:09, Melinda Shore escreveu:
Okay. So, should we be extrapolating from this to what
we can expect from Brazilians if we meet in Buenos
Aires?
On 5/28/13 6:27 PM, Arturo Servin wrote:
Going to Buenos Aires, Sao Paulo, Mexico City or Santiago will always
split audiences as these are the major tech hubs in the region (also add
Bogota, Lima, San Jose and other cities). So, I think it is not
comparable with Australia.
I actually
On 5/28/13 11:47 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
On 5/28/13 6:27 PM, Arturo Servin wrote:
Going to Buenos Aires, Sao Paulo, Mexico City or Santiago will always
split audiences as these are the major tech hubs in the region (also add
Bogota, Lima, San Jose and other cities). So, I think it is
Melinda,
can you confine yourself to disagreeing with something I actually said?
Thanks so much!
Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Melinda Shore
[melinda.sh...@gmail.com]
Sent: 29
Hello,
I agree with the Idea of a IETF meeting in South America.
I think it is a way to let the people know about IETF (of course there are
other ways, but this is a good one), to give the possibility to
students/engineers with very good skills to get into the IETF, thinking
that it is going to
Hello,
I'd also say that I've never heard anyone making that sort of statement.
For instance, the argentinan government itself has a program to increase
Internet connectivity throughout the country --
That is the web page of the program that Fernando mentions,
I went to Adelaide. it was my first IETF. I am now an IETF
regular-irregular, of 10+ years standing. So, proof by example, it
increased Australian participation by at least 1.
In fact, I think by scale, Australians punch above their weight. Especially
if you include americans who live in
Hi,
How about in the Philippines? I can show my homeland...
I can help facilitate the event, why don't you give it a try!
Regards
Medel
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
I rob
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 12:17 PM
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: IETF
Just wondering if some folks realize that IETF meetings are not missionary
trips, conferences, conventions or industry trade shows ...
-Jorge
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Adobe's Secure Real-Time Media Flow Protocol'
draft-thornburgh-adobe-rtmfp-07.txt as Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on
The IESG has completed a review of draft-pornin-deterministic-dsa-01
consistent with RFC5742.
The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'Deterministic Usage of
DSA and ECDSA Digital Signature Algorithms'
draft-pornin-deterministic-dsa-01.txt as an Informational RFC.
The IESG has
The IESG has received a request from the Audio/Video Transport Core
Maintenance WG (avtcore) to consider the following document:
- 'Update to Recommended Codecs for the RTP Profile for Audio and Video
Conferences with Minimal Control (RTP/AVP)'
draft-ietf-avtcore-avp-codecs-02.txt as
The IESG has received a request from the Audio/Video Transport Core
Maintenance WG (avtcore) to consider the following document:
- 'Guidelines for Choosing RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Canonical Names
(CNAMEs)'
draft-ietf-avtcore-6222bis-03.txt as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a
The IESG has received a request from the Audio/Video Transport Core
Maintenance WG (avtcore) to consider the following document:
- 'Inter-destination Media Synchronization using the RTP Control Protocol
(RTCP)'
draft-ietf-avtcore-idms-09.txt as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a
82 matches
Mail list logo
