Re: When will audio recordings of sessions be available?
Now http://feed.verilan.com/ietf/stream06.m3u plays "I still got the blues for you"... will this be archived too? This is new to hear (good) music on the IETF streams, thanks. Alex Philip Matthews a écrit : Thanks for the pointer! - Philip On Tue, 28-Jul-09, at 13:19 , Thomas Narten wrote: Philip Matthews writes: Where will they be posted? Raw unedited mp3s show up at: ftp://videolab.uoregon.edu/pub/videolab/media/ietf75/ Nice job! Some of the Tuesday recordings are already up! Much appreciated! Thomas ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: When will audio recordings of sessions be available?
Yes, it will be archived. :) Nick Kukich Network Engineering nkuk...@verilan.com www.verilan.com VeriLAN Event Services, Inc. 215 SE Morrison Street Suite 7000 Portland, OR 97214 Tel: 503 907-1427 Fax: 503 224-8833 Cell: 503 290-8676 This e-mail contains proprietary information and may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please delete it immediately. On Jul 29, 2009, at 3:00 PM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote: Now http://feed.verilan.com/ietf/stream06.m3u plays "I still got the blues for you"... will this be archived too? This is new to hear (good) music on the IETF streams, thanks. Alex Philip Matthews a écrit : Thanks for the pointer! - Philip On Tue, 28-Jul-09, at 13:19 , Thomas Narten wrote: Philip Matthews writes: Where will they be posted? Raw unedited mp3s show up at: ftp://videolab.uoregon.edu/pub/videolab/media/ietf75/ Nice job! Some of the Tuesday recordings are already up! Much appreciated! Thomas ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
IETF Representative needed in Argentina Sep 5-12 for ITU-T meeting
As the liaison from IETF to ITU-T I find it being important that we continue to have good cooperation between the SDOs. This implies of course that IETF people can be on site at as many ITU-T meetings as possible ITU-T SG-11/13 is meeting in Argentina Sep 1-12. We do have Monique Morrow as an IETF representative Sep 1-5, but she can not stay during the whole meeting. I hereby ask whether there are anyone can represent IETF those days? If so, please let me know. Patrik Fältström PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: [TLS] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-extractor (Keying Material Exporters for Transport Layer Security (TLS)) to Proposed Standard
> Generally speaking, standards are useful, because they enable people to > converge what they are doing. But that ceases to be true when the use of > the standard is patented. It is better to have no standard than have a > standard that invites people into danger. But for any standard, there might be a 'submarine' patent (i.e. one not declared to the IETF, which will be sprung once use of the standard is widespread). That standard will have "invite[d] people into danger". That argument seems to be based on the general premise that "Since we can never be perfectly safe, we should ignore even obvious risks." Or if I don't like a particular proposed standard, I can say 'hey, I have this patent, and I claim it applies'. In theory yes, but it seems unlikely that anyone wants to do this. We should not ignore a real danger to avoid an imaginary one. So what's the answer - no standards at all? Of course not, we take a calculated risk, based on an intuitive cost-benefit analysis, and do the standards. In this case we see a real and specific threat, and we can live without the standard just fine. (And sometimes the benefits of an encumbered standard are actually worth the costs. Case in point, the standards which used RSA public-private keysystems.) Since the patents mostly prevented the use of RSA, there was no room for the standards to do any good, or much harm. ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: [TLS] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-extractor (Keying MaterialExporters for Transport Layer Security (TLS)) to Proposed Standard
Many patents are filed for defensive reasons. Ie. If I don't patent it, then someone else will, and then I won't be able to use the idea I came up with. The other defensive reason is so that if company A tries to sue company B for infringing patents, then company B can threaten to sue company A back - and the end result of the mutual assured destruction is that no one ends up suing anyone else. In other words, patents can actually reduce the number of law suits out there. If you are claiming that one additional software patent can result in fewer software patent infringement lawsuits, indeed that can sometimes be true. But lawsuits are just the tip of the iceberg of the danger of patents. When people decide not to distribute a program, or not to implement a feature, because they fear they would be sued, no lawsuit occurs, but the patent has done harm. In many cases, patents are filed long before the technology is standardized - and, if disclosed properly through the IETF process, can be weighed when determining whether to adopt a standard. IETF should use this leverage to refuse to issue a standard unless the companies in question allow it to be freely implemented and used. In some cases, the IETF may choose to adopt a patent-encumbered standard simply because it's technically superior to other options That is an example of what not to do. ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: [TLS] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-extractor (Keying MaterialExporters for Transport Layer Security (TLS)) to Proposed Standard
I agree completely with Richard Stallman's responses to an earlier email. I repeat the relevant parts of that earlier exchange below. This reflects a basic policy that should be adopted by IETF. /Larry Rosen * Email from RMS: If you are claiming that one additional software patent can result in fewer software patent infringement lawsuits, indeed that can sometimes be true. But lawsuits are just the tip of the iceberg of the danger of patents. When people decide not to distribute a program, or not to implement a feature, because they fear they would be sued, no lawsuit occurs, but the patent has done harm. In many cases, patents are filed long before the technology is standardized - and, if disclosed properly through the IETF process, can be weighed when determining whether to adopt a standard. IETF should use this leverage to refuse to issue a standard unless the companies in question allow it to be freely implemented and used. In some cases, the IETF may choose to adopt a patent-encumbered standard simply because it's technically superior to other options That is an example of what not to do. -Original Message- From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Richard Stallman Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 9:37 PM To: Wes Beebee (wbeebee) Cc: d...@av8.com; ietf-hon...@lists.iadl.org; t...@ietf.org; nicolas.willi...@sun.com; ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [TLS] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-extractor (Keying MaterialExporters for Transport Layer Security (TLS)) to Proposed Standard ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
15-20 years ago at the IETF
At the plenary tonight, I commented on some folk who in the first set of IETF Area Directors. Area Directors and the IESG were first organized in 1989. In researching this bit of history, I was quite struck by the percentage of that early set of Area Directors who are still active in the IETF. Besides myself, I cited Ross Callon, Bob Hinden, and Steve Crocker. As I say, that was in the very first set. But within the next 5 years (up to 1994) the list of still-active early ADs includes: Dave Borman, Allison Mankin, John Klensin, Scott Bradner and Joel Halpern. There are a lot of ISPs that would love a churn rate that low... d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: [TLS] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-extractor (Keying Material Exporters for Transport Layer Security (TLS)) to Proposed Standard
At 9:48 AM -0700 7/20/09, The IESG wrote: >The IESG has received a request from the Transport Layer Security WG >(tls) to consider the following document: > >- 'Keying Material Exporters for Transport Layer Security (TLS) ' >as a Proposed Standard Given the recent discussion, I continue to support the publication of this document as a Standards Track RFC. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
On Thursday's Multipath TCP BOF
Dear all - Since I won't make it to tomorrow's Multipath TCP BOF unfortunately, I would like to express my support for this effort by email. Multipath TCP promises to enable an attractive set of new features -- ranging from automatic fail-over, to load-balancing, to mobility support. Even though there are, of course, important challenges to be surmounted, early analyses indicate the feasibility of the concept as such. And the strong academic background and support from key IETF folks ensures that people with clue and sufficient time will work on it. Therefore, personally, I believe this BOF should be given a thumbs-up for working group establishment. - Christian ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
