I realise that the timekeeping of the IETF is not on a par with its
engineering, but it seems a shame to promulgate a new charter for which
every milestone is already several months in arrears.
Tom Petch
- Original Message -
From: "The IESG"
To: "IETF-Announce"
Cc: "bfd WG"
Sent: Tues
I worry about the allocation of sub-TLVs in this I-D.
It calls for
"The following Sub-TLV changes, which comprise three updates and two
additions, are made for two TLV Types in the aforementioned sub-
registry: TLV Type 1 for "Target FEC Stack", and TLV Type 21 for
"Reply Path"."
and it i
- Original Message -
From: "Russ Housley"
To: "Brian E Carpenter"
Cc: "IETF"
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 5:43 PM
Brian:
Jorge has reviewed this text. He says that the current text and this
proposed text are both summaries. Both say that it is important to read
the BCP to get all
- Original Message -
From: "Adrian Farrel"
To: "'t.p.'" ;
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2012 5:43 PM
> Hello Tom.
>
> Charter text is distinct from milestones.
> The charter is discussed by IESG and put out for community review.
> Milestones are set by the chairs in discussion with their AD.
- Original Message -
From: "SM"
To: "Ted Hardie"
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2012 9:34 PM
> Hi Ted,
> At 11:46 08-11-2012, Ted Hardie wrote:
> >Thinking a bit about the directions that conversation took, I think
> >there is both a relatively simple answer to Andrew's question and a
Original Message -
From: "Carlos M. martinez"
To:
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 5:24 PM
I'll take the silence as a NO :-)
IETF protocols have since long required to countenance both IPv6 and
Management, which for the most part means SNMP, so the developers of a
protocol to support e.
- Original Message -
From: "Brian E Carpenter"
To: "Melinda Shore"
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 8:11 AM
> On 15/11/2012 03:43, Melinda Shore wrote:
> ...
> > Right, I understand that (better than you might think - I live in
> > Alaska). But. I'm trying to understand the value
More thoughts inline three times (and apologies for the slow
response).
- Original Message -
From: "Mach Chen"
To: "t.p." ;
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 12:24 PM
Hi Tom,
Many thanks for your comments!
Please see my reply inline with [Mach]
Best regards,
Mach
- Original Message -
From: "Barry Leiba"
To: "IETF discussion list"
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 6:00 PM
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Dale R. Worley
wrote:
> >
> >> That attendance showed me that most of the IETF meeting was a
> >> waste of time, that it was e-mail that was t
- Original Message -
From: "Pete Resnick"
To: "Peter Saint-Andre"
Cc: ; "IETF discussion list"
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 10:56 PM
> On 11/28/12 4:45 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > On 11/28/12 2:45 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> >
> >> ps. I'll repeat that I think f2f needs to be es
- Original Message -
From: "Yaron Sheffer"
To:
Cc: ; "'Alessandro Vesely'"
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 2:52 PM
> Hi Adrian,
>
> I would suggest to start with my proposal, because it requires zero
> implementation effort.
I am surprised at this. Gathering information about impleme
- Original Message -
From: "Marc Blanchet"
To: "Loa Andersson"
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 3:39 PM
Le 2012-12-13 à 10:22, Loa Andersson a écrit :
> Folks,
>
> I agree that understanding the implementation status of a draft
> sometimes is essential, but not for all drafts and n
I wonder if anyone else has read and understood this. I have read it,
but, pdf of a slide show that it is, I could not claim to understand
it - perhaps there is text available that would make it clearer. I do
see the bit that is like the old, IP, Classful address structure, that
the IETF tried an
- Original Message -
From: "David Morris"
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 10:16 PM
>
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, ned+i...@mauve.mrochek.com wrote:
>
> > At one point there was something that said one phone in each home
had to be
> > directly wired without a plug. I don't know if this was
I notice too that MEP and MIP are incorrectly expanded:-(
Tom Petch
- Original Message -
From: "Huub van Helvoort"
To: "Greg Mirsky"
Cc: ; ; "Bitar, Nabil N"
; ;
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: [PWE3] Gen-ART review of
draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk-06
> Hello
- Original Message -
From: "William Jordan"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 4:57 AM
> I've recent had to write a program to interface with a SIP lync server
and
> in doing so have had to code to several rfcs. After reading and
dealing
> with implementation of the various rfcs I have
- Original Message -
From: "Janet P Gunn"
To: "William Jordan"
Cc: ;
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: A modest proposal
> Do none of you know what the phrase "a modest proposal" refers to?
>
> Try googling it.
Or else look through the archives; Margaret explained i
- Original Message -
From: "Thomas Narten"
To: "Joe Touch"
Cc: ;
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 9:31 PM
> FWIW, I share Joe's concerns. And Stephen's responses don't really
> change my mind.
>
> This document seems to have a bit of missing the forest for the
> trees. In the overall sche
- Original Message -
From: "Eliot Lear"
To: "John C Klensin"
Cc: "Thomas Narten" ; ;
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 3:31 PM
> John,
>
> On 1/25/13 4:27 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
> >>> a WG can
> >>> skip WG LC if they think its not needed.
> >> ???
> >>
> >> When was the last time that h
- Original Message -
From: "Stephen Farrell"
To:
Cc: "John C Klensin" ; "Thomas Narten"
; ;
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 10:47 PM
>
> Hi Martin,
>
> On 01/25/2013 09:36 PM, Martin Rex wrote:
> > I don't know about the last time it happened, but I know about
> > one time in Nov-2009 in
Time to publication of an RFC can be reduced by cutting out the pauses,
which could achieved by highlighting when they occur.
This can be done by a tool which, for every active Working Group, runs
monthly and, for every draft adopted by the Working Group, records
whether or not there has been a ch
- Original Message -
From: "SM"
To: "t.p."
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 4:51 PM
> Hi Tom,
> At 04:04 31-01-2013, t.p. wrote:
> >Time to publication of an RFC can be reduced by cutting out the
pauses,
> >which could achieved by highlighting when they occur.
>
> [snip]
>
> >Such
- Original Message -
From: "John C Klensin"
To: "t.p."
Cc: "ietf"
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 2:44 PM
>
> --On Thursday, January 31, 2013 12:04 + "t.p."
> wrote:
>
> > Time to publication of an RFC can be reduced by cutting out
> > the pauses, which could achieved by highlighti
- Original Message -
From: "Dave Crocker"
To: "Sam Hartman"
Cc: "Abdussalam Baryun" ; "ietf"
; "Lixia Zhang"
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2013 6:38 PM
>
> On 2/3/2013 10:28 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > I'm not sure I've ever been involved with a WG where you could have
> > gotten consensus o
Whoops, I lost a 'not'
Tom Petch
> - Original Message -
> From: "Dave Crocker"
> To: "Sam Hartman"
> Cc: "Abdussalam Baryun" ; "ietf"
> ; "Lixia Zhang"
> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2013 6:38 PM
> >
> > On 2/3/2013 10:28 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > > I'm not sure I've ever been involved w
>From the title, I was expecting something a little deeper; I find this
I-D strong on current detail, less so on the underlying, perhaps
more lasting issues.
For example, as has been pointed out on these lists before, identifiers
refer to an identity and an object may have multiple identities in
d
- Original Message -
From: "Margaret Wasserman"
To: "Pete Resnick"
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 10:49 PM
On Feb 26, 2013, at 5:38 PM, Pete Resnick
wrote:
> But more seriously: I agree with you both. The deadline is silly.
+1
The deadline originated because the secretariat ne
Can anyone help an ignorant European? Given a meeting time of 12:00
Noon ET [sic] on Sunday 10th March 2013, what is that in UTC? Daylight
saving will have started by then in the USA but not in Europe so the
scope for being an hour late or an hour early is much increased.
Tom Petch
- Origin
I think that this I-D has one hole in it but it is a massive one. It
places no limit on the size to which an alternative format could expand
our documents.
I was reminded of this when I received a 514kbyte e-mail from another
SDO on an IETF list. I saved the text and so lost the exact formatting
- Original Message -
From: "John Levine"
To:
Cc:
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 7:44 PM
> >There should be an immutable requirement that any alternative format
> >MUST NOT increase the size by more than a factor of two compared to
> >ASCII text.
>
> So you're saying you're unalterably opp
- Original Message -
From: "Dale R. Worley"
To: "t.p."
Cc: ;
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 7:56 PM
> > From: "t.p."
> >
> > The result was 32kbyte, ie the
> > formatting used by another SDO had increased the size 16-fold, a
16-fold
> > increase in network traffic, a 16-fold increase in
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Hoffman"
To: "t.p."
Cc: ; ; "ietf"
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 8:58 PM
Subject: Re: Call for Comment: "RFC Format Requirements and Future
Development"
On Mar 1, 2013, at 9:59 AM, t.p. wrote:
> There should be an immutable requirement that any alterna
Jari
The day after your post I read that
"
The 2012-2013 IETF nomination process has not yet filled the Transport
Area Director position despite several attempts to broaden the pool of
nominees. "
which to me sums it up. ADs are the critical resource, on the critical
path in project management t
- Original Message -
From: "Andrew Sullivan"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 12:30 AM
Subject: Re: Call for Comment: "RFC Format Requirements and Future
Development"
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 12:48:53AM +0100, Martin Rex wrote:
> > Limiting the waste of network bandwidth seems like a
- Original Message -
From: "Sam Hartman"
To: "Mary Barnes"
Cc: "Sam Hartman" ; "IETF"
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 8:26 PM
> > "Mary" == Mary Barnes writes:
>
> Mary> And, I continue to support Sam's position as well. To me
the
> Mary> question at hand is whether it will d
- Original Message -
From: "Martin Stiemerling"
To: "t.p."
Cc: "Sam Hartman" ; "IETF"
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 11:13 AM
> Hi Tom,
>
> On 03/05/2013 11:38 AM, t.p. wrote:
> > - Original Message - From: "Sam Hartman"
> > To: "Mary Barnes"
> > Cc: "Sam Hartman"
> > ; "IETF"
- Original Message -
From:
To: ;
Cc: ;
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 12:53 PM
Ah, the 'but security, unlike transport, is actually important'
argument.
Having seen subscribers to that philosophy unsuccessfully attempt to
design
transport protocols (and raise the MD5 issue repeatedly,
Original Message -
From: "Eggert, Lars"
To: "t.p."
Cc: ; ;
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 4:18 PM
On Mar 5, 2013, at 15:10, t.p. wrote:
> The question is can we do with a
> Transport Area Director whose congestion control skills are limited; I
> am suggesting we can, because of all the
- Original Message -
From: "Cameron Byrne"
To: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)"
Cc: ;
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 8:01 PM
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:55 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
wrote:
> I've no idea about the example quoted, but I can see some of their
motivation.
In the 3GPP case o
- Original Message -
From: "Cameron Byrne"
To: "Brian E Carpenter"
Cc: ; "IETF-Discussion" ; "Dearlove,
Christopher (UK)" ; "t.p."
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 4:12 PM
> On Mar 6, 2013 1:03 AM, "Brian E Carpenter"
> wrote:
> >
> > On 06/03/2013 08:36, t.p. wrote:
> > ...
> > > Intere
- Original Message -
From: "S Moonesamy"
To: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)"
Cc:
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2013 2:13 PM
> At 05:25 08-03-2013, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) wrote:
> >You need at least two more properties
> >
> > (iii) High technical standard products
> >
> > (iv) Efficient
>
- Original Message -
From: "Stephen Casner"
To: "Noel Chiappa"
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 3:10 PM
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2013, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>
> >
> > > "Martian" is nice expression.
> >
> > Weren't 'unusual' packets called 'Martians' at some early stage of
Internet
> > work
- Original Message -
From: "Melinda Shore"
To:
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 1:11 AM
>
> We have the mailing list archives, we've got the document shepherd
> writeups, we've got the IESG evaluation record, we've got the IESG
> writeups, we've got meeting minutes, we've got jabber session
>
Ray
Expert as the IETF (and its allied organisations) is in Internet
Engineering, I doubt if many of those skills transfer into Social
Engineering, which is the field in which I think this question lies.
Lacking such expertise, into how to frame a question in order to get the
answer which is wante
- Original Message -
From: "Arturo Servin"
To:
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 8:28 PM
>
> Not answering any particular post. Just a comment.
>
> The IESG should be there to attest that the IETF procedure was
followed
> and the document reached consensus in the WG and in the IETF LC and it
>
- Original Message -
From: "Lou Berger"
To: "Melinda Shore"
Cc:
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2013 1:09 PM
> Melinda,
> I'm not so sure debating the merits of a specific measure has value or
> not is really that helpful, and I probably just should have ignore
this
> small point. Let's say s
- Original Message -
From:
To: ; ;
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2013 3:46 AM
If you think security and congestion are arcane, you have... problems.
This was an actual ietf working geoup, and not some e.g. W3c thing?
Lloyd
Yes, e.g. in Operations and Management.
I track ICCRG (and have
- Original Message -
From: "Dan Harkins"
To: "Andrew Sullivan"
Cc:
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 4:59 AM
On Thu, April 18, 2013 6:44 pm, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 08:17:21AM -0700, Dan Harkins wrote:
>> So a problem statement has been made: there is a notable lack
Original Message -
From: "Clint Chaplin"
To: "IETF Discussion List"
Cc:
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 9:39 PM
> Why did this (and the other most recent) last call also not go to
> IETF-Announce?
And I was wondering why I got four copies of it, three on April 20th,
one on April 22nd. Pa
David
A thoughtful assessment, and what it brings out for me is that we do not
have an Information Model:-( That is, we could have reverse engineered
an Information Model from the IF-MIB and then produced a data model in
YANG, but that did not happen. Rather, there is a new and different
(implic
- Original Message -
From: "Christian Huitema"
To: "Fernando Gont" ; "SM"
Cc: "RJ Atkinson" ;
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 6:02 PM
Instead, the draft goes into great details on how to actually implement
the random number generator. Apart from not being necessary, some of
these detail
- Original Message -
From: "Margaret Wasserman"
To: "t.p."
Cc: "Dan Harkins" ;
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 1:53 AM
Hi Tom,
On Apr 19, 2013, at 6:03 AM, t.p. wrote:
> If we required the IETF to reflect the diversity of people who are,
> e.g., IT network professionals, then the IETF wo
- Original Message -
From: "Warren Kumari"
To: "Joe Abley"
Cc: "Sam Hartman" ; ;
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 10:01 PM
On Apr 29, 2013, at 4:55 PM, Joe Abley wrote:
>
> On 2013-04-29, at 16:49, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
>>> "Stewart" == Stewart Bryant writes:
>>
>>
>> Stewart> Why
- Original Message -
From: "Jari Arkko"
To: "IETF list"
Cc: "Pete Resnick"
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 4:33 PM
Subject: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process
I wrote a blog article about how we do a fairly significant amount of
reviews and changes in the late stages of the IETF pro
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Saint-Andre"
To: "Marc Petit-Huguenin"
Cc: "Yaron Sheffer" ;
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 12:13 AM
>
> On 5/2/13 4:03 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
> > On 05/02/2013 02:40 PM, Yaron Sheffer wrote:
> > An alternative would be to have the RFC-editor doing c
Original Message -
From: "TZI"
To: "t.p."
Cc: "Peter Saint-Andre" ; "Marc Petit-Huguenin"
; "Yaron Sheffer" ; "ietf"
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: Language editing
> We really do need a tool, the like of which I was using 40 years ago
> when writing code, that allows
- Original Message -
From: "Ray Pelletier"
To:
Cc: "Thomas Narten" ; "IETF list"
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 3:29 PM
On May 3, 2013, at 10:20 AM, "Adrian Farrel"
wrote:
> Well said, Thomas.
>
>> Two concrete suggestions:
>>
>> 1) have WGs do the managing role more proactively
Provide
I wanted to submit an I-D so I wanted to access the tools, as I have
done before, so I clicked on 'IETF Tools' from
http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/
and when that failed tried again with 'Tools Team Pages' from
http://www.ietf.org/iesg/
with the same result. Can anyone else get to tools from that l
Tom Petch
- Original Message -
From: "Dale R. Worley"
To: "t.p."
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 8:37 PM
Subject: Re: Accessing tools from IETF pages
> > From: "t.p."
> >
> > I wanted to submit an I-D so I wanted to access the tools, as I have
> > done before, so I clicked on 'IET
- Original Message -
From: "Dave Crocker"
To:
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 4:37 PM
> On 5/17/2013 7:01 AM, Keith Moore wrote:
> > But WGs should be able to periodically summarize what they're
doing -
> > what problem they're trying to solve, what approach they're taking,
what
> > technologi
- Original Message -
From: "Lou Berger"
To: "Yoav Nir"
Cc:
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 5:07 PM
Subject: Re: IETF Meeting in South America
> > For Americans, is it much more expensive than a trip to Prague?
>
> I just happen to be looking at flights for berlin at the moment. BA
is
> pre
Original Message -
From: "Melinda Shore"
To:
Cc: ;
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 8:06 AM
> On 5/29/13 10:53 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> > I see a wedge :-)
> > The problem is where to stop.
>
> Well, I don't know. Maybe the problem is where to
> start. That is to say, I don't know what
- Original Message -
From:
To:
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 10:55 PM
Subject: Renaming RFC
RFC should be renamed to Resulted From Comments. It's now the endpoint
of the process; Request For Comments dated from when it was the start.
Fundamentally disagree.
Some SDOs produce stand
- Original Message -
From: "Pete Resnick"
To: "Stephen Farrell"
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 8:45 PM
Subject: Re: Content-free Last Call comments
It's interesting to see that people are interpreting me to mean I want
more text. I don't. I want less. Save your breath. There is no re
- Original Message -
From: "IETF Administrative Director"
To: "IETF Announcement List"
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 7:59 PM
One of the IAOC goals for 2013 was to update the IAOC website to improve
consistency, organization, linkage, and ease of use.
I am pleased to announce that the IA
Original Message -
From: "Brian E Carpenter"
To: "t.p."
Cc: "ietf" ;
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 9:26 PM
> Tom,
>
> On 25/06/2013 22:48, t.p. wrote:
> ...
> > The main impression that this page has on me is that this is a part
of
> > the IETF,
>
> Yes. It is a committee set up by the I
The I-D points out the impossibility of specifying how to handle the many
different tokens that a browser may encounter in the about: scheme and then
goes on to tell us what Opera does.
I am uncomfortable with a Standards Track document telling us about the
behaviour of one and only one product,
Any reason why I cannot see the e-mail to which this is a reply?
It never arrived at my MUA, which could well be my MUA, but it is not in the
ietf archives either which suggests ? I seem to recall this happening
before from the same e-mail address on this same list.
What else am I, and I ass
Original Message -
From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)"
To: "Melinda Shore"
Cc: ;
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 1:12 AM
Subject: RE: Proposed IESG Statement on the Conclusion of Experiments
I wasn't discussing the point about whether there should be a process change or
not. Rather, I don't thi
- Original Message -
From: "Huub van Helvoort"
To:
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 4:52 PM
Hi Dale,
You wondered:
>> and btw my motto:
>>
>> "geek c ést chic!"
>
> What responses do you receive to your motto?
That it is spelled wrong...
Sad, isn't it? All that effort on i18e and we s
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Barton"
To:
Cc: "Barry Leiba"
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 7:18 AM
> On 05/16/2012 06:59, Barry Leiba wrote:
> > In fact, RFC 2119 says that the normative keywords are "often
> > capitalized", but doesn't require that they be.
>
> Standards should be writ
Original Message -
From: "Ben Niven-Jenkins"
To: "Ole Jacobsen"
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 11:36 PM
On 31 May 2012, at 09:16, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
> Sounds like a difficult thing to do with any kind of predictable or
> measurable outcome, although it might be fun to ask the Brits i
Just to make public what I have hinted at privately, I think that steps
in section 4.1 may be somewhat underspecified.
They give the logic a client, one which supports both DHCP and DNS,
should
follow in order to find a KDC, with DNS information being preferred.
One scenario outlined in section 1
- Original Message -
From: "ssakane"
To: "t.p."
Cc: ;
; "ietf"
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 2:29 PM
> Hi Tom,
>
> Some reviewers suggested me to just remove the figure and its
description in
> 4.1 because it has ambiguity. I think it would be better to leave the
1st
> paragraph in sectio
Original Message -
From: "ssakane"
To: "t.p."
Cc: ;
; "ietf"
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2012 1:55 AM
> Removing the section 4.1 to an Appendix is nicer idea rather than just
> deleting it.
Yes, but for me it is definitely second best.
Arguably, following the steps in s 4.1 is necessary
- Original Message -
From: "Noel Chiappa"
To:
Cc: ; ;
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 10:47 PM
> > From: Ole Jacobsen
>
> > using the American "quotation outside punctuation rule."
>
> Ugh. There may be uglier typographic conventions, but off the top of
my head,
> I can't come up w
- Original Message -
From: "Samuel Weiler"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 11:59 PM
>
> Sorting that list by affiliation and counting the number of names from
> each affiliation, the volunteer list as of Monday included:
>
> 16 Huawai
> 15 Cisco
> 13 Ericsson
> 9 Juniper
> 5 ZTE
> 4
What is the position of the IRTF on this?
Tom Petch
- Original Message -
From: "Russ Housley"
To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)"
Cc: "IETF"
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 11:53 PM
Dan:
Only protocol specifications make use of Ethertypes. The statement is
intended to apply to any protocol spec
- Original Message -
From: "Andrew G. Malis"
To: "IETF Administrative Director"
Cc: "IETF Discussion"
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 10:42 PM
Subject: Re: Proposed IETF 95 Date Change
>
On the
> other hand, travel on 27 March should be relatively easy.
Precisely, which makes the origi
Original Message -
From: "Alessandro Vesely"
To:
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 4:19 PM
On Thu 02/Aug/2012 03:28:38 -0700 Martin J. Dürst wrote:
>
>> In particular, the errata system is NOT meant to be used as an issue
>> tracker;
>
> Of course we have mailing lists, issue trackers, and w
- Original Message -
From: "Yoav Nir"
To: "t.p."
Cc: "Alessandro Vesely" ;
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 11:58 AM
On Aug 7, 2012, at 11:29 AM, t.p. wrote:
> When I Google RFC, I am sometimes directed to www.ietf.org, which
is
> not much help here. Other times, I am directed to tools
- Original Message -
From: "Alessandro Vesely"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 6:09 PM
> On Tue 07/Aug/2012 15:20:35 +0200 t.p. wrote:
> > From: "Yoav Nir"
> >
> >> Would it make it easier to find if they were called "notes" or
> >> "corrections" instead of "errata"?
> >
> > Yes, c
Original Message -
From: "Geoff Mulligan"
To: "Richard Shockey"
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 5:34 PM
I also would vote to return to Minneapolis again and again even
permanently.
So, would I despite London 2014 being only a train ride away.
Minneapolis has the flights, and fli
- Original Message -
From: "ALAIN AINA"
To: "IETF"
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:21 PM
I will say "there are potential uses of the ITU for good".
Yes, they did a brilliant job in developing standards which allow
the proprietary phone network of one country to interface to
the propr
We seem to have adopted a policy of making the summer meeting overlap
what is for me the start of school holidays, and a time to avoid
travelling.
I used to think of IETF54, IETF57 and IETF66 as the norm and anything
else as an aberration, but now it seems the reverse is true.
Incidentally, I not
When I read the original IESG statement, I thought it sloppily worded,
since it did not use the same terminology as in
http://www.ietf.org/ietf-ftp/1id-guidelines.txt
which has been cited below.
I then wondered if the sloppy, as I saw it, wording might reflect less
than precise thinking in the se
And now there seems to be another unannounced change, in that in
addition to the usual announcement format e-mails, there may also be, or
may not be, the appearance seems random, of
Subject: New Version Notification -
e-mails. This may or may not be an improvement, depending on how long
it takes
Dave
I think the points you make below are good, once the newcomer to the
IETF has found their working group. This is not always easy. Fine if
your interest is in OSPF, ISIS, TLS, TCPMaintenance but in other
spheres, the IETF approach of choosing a 'witty' name seems to me less
than welcoming.
Original Message -
From: "John R Levine"
To: "Yoav Nir"
Cc:
Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2013 10:47 PM
Subject: Re: Speaking of VAT
>
> Ray said the tax guys told him the IETF would get back about half of
the
> VAT it paid. That's unrelated to what anyone can reclaim.
>
> My understanding
Chris
I would not like to see the Trust Agreement change to accommodate issues
one or two - I think that the agreement got that one right.
Three is different. The Trust ought to be able to dispose of rights
that are not needed, never will be and are costing money. But how can
that be expressed
- Original Message -
From: "Ted Lemon"
To: "John Levine"
Cc: "IETF Discussion Mailing List"
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 4:03 PM
> On Aug 13, 2013, at 9:51 AM, John Levine wrote:
> > There's no great way
> > to send around a redlined document and I'd say that Word formats are
> > curr
I recently saw 'deprecate' used in an IANA Considerations and turned to
"IANA Considerations" [RFC5226] to see how it was defined only to find
no mention of it there. I am used to the term from SMI, as quoted
below, but that seems not quite right, in that a deprecated IANA entry
never disappears,
This I-D uses the term 'deprecated' without defining it nor is the term
defined in "IANA Considerations" [RFC5226] " (It does however already
appear in the IANA Registry).
I am familiar with the SMI definition but that seems not quite right for
this context; some of the IANA uses of this have been
Roni
I find it difficult to know whether to agree with you or not since there
is another "gorilla" operating in this namespace, namely
draft-andersson-mpls-lsp-ping-upd-00
which sort of gives the option of taking out the sub-TLV types of a TLV
Type into a separate registry which can then be refere
Original Message -
From: "Adrian Farrel"
To: "'Michelle Cotton'" ; "'Dearlove,
Christopher (UK)'" ; "'t.p.'"
; "'ietf'"
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 4:13 PM
Subject: RE: "Deprecate"
> That would be great.
>
> Should 4020bis have a gating normative reference on 5226bis?
Tricky; it
- Original Message -
From: "t.p."
To: ; "'Michelle Cotton'"
; "'ietf'"
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 4:35 PM
> Original Message -
> From: "Adrian Farrel"
> To: "'Michelle Cotton'" ; "'Dearlove,
> Christopher (UK)'" ; "'t.p.'"
> ; "'ietf'"
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 4:
- Original Message -
From: "Phillip Hallam-Baker"
To: "Andrew Sullivan"
Cc: "IETF Discussion Mailing List"
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 4:56 AM
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 11:32 PM, Andrew Sullivan
wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 03:28:28PM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> > >
> >
Original Message -
From: "Richard Barnes"
To: "Peter Saint-Andre"
Cc:
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 6:14 PM
> It also makes it obvious to everyone that Peter is using PGP. Which
serves
> a pedagogical function, I guess. :)
It also means I can readily view his e-mails, which may or
It is a shame that this opportunity was not taken to highlight the need
for authentication. Having a totally secure channel with perfect
encryption is of little value if the other end of the channel is a
hostile power.
RFC3365, which you cite, gets in right (of course!). It lists three
requireme
- Original Message -
From: "Ted Lemon"
To: "t.p."
Cc: "Richard Barnes" ; "Peter Saint-Andre"
;
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 2:03 PM
On Sep 10, 2013, at 4:41 AM, t.p. wrote:
> for reasons of
> security, of course; html has far too many attack vectors to allow it
to
> be processed in
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
