Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Patrik Fältström]

On 18 dec 2009, at 21.55, Cullen Jennings wrote:

> The work in ECRIT has certainly helped the state of deployed E911 over VoIP 
> to be much better today than it was in say 2000.

Sweden 911-service evolution (SIP based signalling directly to the PSAP) is 
very closely following what is happening in ECRIT.

   Patrik

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Scott Brim]

Brian E Carpenter allegedly wrote on 12/18/2009 16:11 EST:
> What somebody (ISOC?) should do is counter the absurd meme that
> the ITU is "the United Nations body in charge of internet standards."

I suspect that came from the reporter.

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Brian E Carpenter]

On 2009-12-19 06:26, John C Klensin wrote:
> 
> --On Friday, December 18, 2009 12:10 -0500 Marshall Eubanks
>  wrote:
> 
>>> What's so bogus about wanting to charge for traffic?
>> Where I would raise a flag is, charge whom ?
>>
>> This sounds very much like the way that international long
>> distance used to be done. That the Internet does not support
>> that is to me, at least, not a bug but a very desirable
>> feature.

Maybe, but charging per byte and charging more for offshore bytes
are both entirely feasible for ISPs to do, and have been for many
years. Therefore, it's entirely feasible for governments to tax
such charges. So I'm not sure there is actually any news here.
Whether you'd be willing to trust IPFIX as the way to measure
traffic is another story, but really a detail.

What somebody (ISOC?) should do is counter the absurd meme that
the ITU is "the United Nations body in charge of internet standards."

> But, from the perspective of many of the participants in the ITU
> (and some of the countries), that old regime was profoundly
> attractive: easy to regulate, easy to tax, easy to decide who
> gets to carry traffic in and out of the relevant country, etc.
> This goes hand-in-hand with nostalgia for various forms and
> properties of circuit-switched networks, especially wrt QOS,
> emergency services, and network management.   Probably that
> means that precisely the things that contribute to your seeing
> it as a feature are things they consider bugs... or at least
> appropriate only for research networks.

Absolutely. Charging was at the root of the old PTT monopolist's
hatred of IP and their love of X.25. But that war was over many
years ago. Apparently a few soldiers have just emerged from hiding
in the forest, thinking the war is still in progress.

Brian

> 
> And then we wonder why we have trouble communicating with the
> ITU and assorted bellheads :-(
> 
>  john
> 
> ___
> 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: Most bogus news story of the week

[Cullen Jennings]

The work in ECRIT has certainly helped the state of deployed E911 over VoIP to 
be much better today than it was in say 2000. More importantly, the progress 
that the industry is making in various SDOs, including the IETF, has been the 
primary factor that has caused regulators to not pass some regulations over 
E911 and VoIP. In my opinion they type of regulations that would have been 
passed at this early stage would probably have been overall harmful. 

When you have a case like what happened in Canada where a child is dead and 
probably would be alive had a PSTN phone had been used instead of a VoIP phone, 
well it's not easy to convince regulators not to "Do something" about the 
problem. Obviously I think we ought to be doing something about better 
emergency calling but I believe a well thought out global industry based 
approach is superior to a knee jerk driven reaction done on a country by 
country basis. 

Cullen 


On Dec 18, 2009, at 11:45 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote:

> 
> 
> On 12/18/2009 10:10 AM, Richard L. Barnes wrote:
>>> This goes hand-in-hand with nostalgia for various forms and
>>> properties of circuit-switched networks, especially wrt ...
>>> emergency services
>> 
>> This one at least we have a story on:
>> 
> 
> 
> The emulation is perhaps better than we would like.
> 
> How many years has the IETF been working on this topic, and how much 
> real-world deployment (and use) is there, so far?
> 
> d/
> -- 
> 
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net
> ___
> 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: Most bogus news story of the week

[Sam Hartman]

> "Olivier" == Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond  writes:

Olivier> "Ole Jacobsen"  wrote:
>> 
> (except it's not a joke)

Olivier> As someone who has confronted some of these gentle people
Olivier> at IGF, let me tell you it is not a joke.

Olivier> I am always flabbergasted about what I hear, and never
Olivier> understand whom they get their information from. It is
Olivier> often full of inaccuracies, cognitive biaises,
Olivier> generalisations, misunderstandings and old world thinking,
Olivier> which, would you believe it, actually makes up for a rather
Olivier> "amusing" view of the Internet.

A few years ago I was going to the airport from an IETF and happened to
be in a shuttle with some BT folks talking about NGN.  It was very
amusing to listen to their descriptions of us and our bogus thinking,
lack of understanding of critical issues, and how serious work on the
NGN could not take place in such an environment.

Really though, listening to this discussion, I still cannot bring myself
to describe the Chinese desire as "most bogus ever."  They are wanting
to map an existing world view onto something new.  It is, as several
people have pointed out a very problematic mapping, and one that for
various technical, social and political reasons we oppose.  That doesn't
make someone at a high level "most bogus ever," for having the idea,
even if we believe we have enough information to conclude they are
wrong.

We can point and laugh at how wrong-headed someone is, sure in the back
of our minds that they are doing the same about us, or we can understand
where they are coming from and try to engage.  Some days, I'm not sure
which option is better:-) Pointing and laughing, is easy and if you're
in a group that mostly agrees with you can use the mob mentality to make
you feel good and important.  Engaging on the other hand often feels
like fighting an up-hill battle that never really seems to make as much
progress as it must.  It does, however, in my view have the moral high
ground.
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[John Levine]

>"Bogus" because it's a bad idea or because the reporter significantly
>misunderstood/misrepresented what the suggestion is actually about?

I read the story, and I think the reporter understood the discussion
pretty well, except perhaps for the distinction between capacity and
traffic.

We all know that networks in the US and other developed countries are
rarely willing to peer with networks in less developed countries, so
transit money tends to flow from the LDCs to the US.  The LDCs have
always hated that, since it is the exact opposite of the phone system
where they carefully track the minutes in each direction and the
settlement money has historically gushed from the developed countries
to the LDCs.  So they want the ITU to make rules that the Internet has
to work like the phone system, at least financially.  The Chinese,
being sophisticated, would presumably also like detailed traffic stats
so they know who's talking to whom.

I don't understand ITU politics well enough to know how much of an
issue this is likely to be in practice.  I know the US has some
carveouts in its agreements to implement ITU standards, e.g., our
phone system signalling is entirely different from theirs, and have no
idea how that would affect an ITU decision that might apply via the US
to ICANN.

R's,
John

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond]

"Ole Jacobsen"  wrote:




(except it's not a joke)


As someone who has confronted some of these gentle people at IGF, let me 
tell you it is not a joke.


I am always flabbergasted about what I hear, and never understand whom they 
get their information from. It is often full of inaccuracies, cognitive 
biaises, generalisations, misunderstandings and old world thinking, which, 
would you believe it, actually makes up for a rather "amusing" view of the 
Internet.


Kind regards,

--
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html 


___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Bob Hinden]

>> " 
> 
> Van Jacobsen used to have a slide set titled "Circuits: The Search for
> the Cure".
> 

See: 

   http://www.sigcomm.org/about/awards/sigcomm-awards/vj-sigcomm01.pdf

Bob

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Scott Brim]

Stephane Bortzmeyer allegedly wrote on 12/18/2009 10:41 EST:
> In France (translated by me):
> 
> http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/actualites/politique/20091217.OBS1017/un_depute_ump_propose_de_nationaliser_le_reseau_interne.html
> 
> A member of parliament (UMP, the party of the president) wants to
> nationalize Internet
> 
> "Today, Internet is completely rotten", says Jacques Myard. "We have
> to nationalize this network, as the Chinese did." 

Van Jacobsen used to have a slide set titled "Circuits: The Search for
the Cure".

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Robert Moskowitz]

Dave CROCKER wrote:



On 12/18/2009 10:10 AM, Richard L. Barnes wrote:

This goes hand-in-hand with nostalgia for various forms and
properties of circuit-switched networks, especially wrt ...
emergency services


This one at least we have a story on:




The emulation is perhaps better than we would like.

How many years has the IETF been working on this topic, and how much 
real-world deployment (and use) is there, so far? 


Meanwhile check out:

http://www.ieee802.org/ecsg/

I am working on getting approvals to attend this.
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Dave CROCKER]

On 12/18/2009 10:10 AM, Richard L. Barnes wrote:

This goes hand-in-hand with nostalgia for various forms and
properties of circuit-switched networks, especially wrt ...
emergency services


This one at least we have a story on:




The emulation is perhaps better than we would like.

How many years has the IETF been working on this topic, and how much real-world 
deployment (and use) is there, so far?


d/
--

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Steven Bellovin]

On Dec 18, 2009, at 10:24 AM, Ole Jacobsen wrote:

> 
> (except it's not a joke)
> 
> 
> Chinese proposal to meter Internet traffic
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8417680.stm
> 
> China wants to meter all internet traffic that passes through its 
> borders, it has emerged.
> 
> The move would require international agreement - but it is being 
> discussed by the United Nations body in charge of internet standards. 
> 
> 
> 
> "An ITU spokesman said: "The ITU has no plans to modify the BGP 
> protocol, which is not an ITU-T standard."
> 
> 
"Bogus" because it's a bad idea or because the reporter significantly 
misunderstood/misrepresented what the suggestion is actually about?


--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb





___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Richard L. Barnes]

This goes hand-in-hand with nostalgia for various forms and
properties of circuit-switched networks, especially wrt ...
emergency services


This one at least we have a story on:


___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Robert Moskowitz]

Marshall Eubanks wrote:


On Dec 18, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:


"Richard" == Richard L Barnes  writes:


Richard> Here's (what the ITU claims is) the specific proposal that
Richard> has been made to the ITU: " An ITU spokesman said: "The ITU
Richard> has no plans to modify the BGP protocol, which is not an
Richard> ITU-T standard. "A proposal has been made, and is being
Richard> studied, to use BGP routers to collect traffic flow data,
Richard> which could be used, by bilateral agreement, by operators
Richard> for billing purposes."

Richard> "

Richard> Is this disingenuous or has the ITU really not heard of
Richard> netflow?

What's so bogus about wanting to charge for traffic?


Where I would raise a flag is, charge whom ?

This sounds very much like the way that international long distance 
used to be done. That the Internet does not support that is to me, at 
least, not a bug but a very desirable feature.


And you can get into transit charges. How much does Country B charge for 
data from Country A going to Country C?


Oh such FUN Shades of X.25 gateways! Oh, oh, and Teletypes. Oh yes 
it was SOOO much fun working out the best way to route messages back in 
my Automotive days... We need X.400-style routing tables back!


YES More jobs for all of us! Just skim a little of those mega bucks 
off to pay for our meetings




Marshall



I mean you might
not want to have your traffic go somewhere where it's going to be
expensive, but governments have been charging for and taxing things for
a long time.

If the technical details of how to accomplish this are bogus (and
changing BGP to include flow data would be), then perhaps that should be
fixed. However judging something on all the things a spokesperson says
it is *not* seems counter productive.



___
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: Most bogus news story of the week

[John C Klensin]

--On Friday, December 18, 2009 12:10 -0500 Marshall Eubanks
 wrote:

>> What's so bogus about wanting to charge for traffic?
> 
> Where I would raise a flag is, charge whom ?
> 
> This sounds very much like the way that international long
> distance used to be done. That the Internet does not support
> that is to me, at least, not a bug but a very desirable
> feature.

But, from the perspective of many of the participants in the ITU
(and some of the countries), that old regime was profoundly
attractive: easy to regulate, easy to tax, easy to decide who
gets to carry traffic in and out of the relevant country, etc.
This goes hand-in-hand with nostalgia for various forms and
properties of circuit-switched networks, especially wrt QOS,
emergency services, and network management.   Probably that
means that precisely the things that contribute to your seeing
it as a feature are things they consider bugs... or at least
appropriate only for research networks.

And then we wonder why we have trouble communicating with the
ITU and assorted bellheads :-(

 john

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Marshall Eubanks]

On Dec 18, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:


"Richard" == Richard L Barnes  writes:


   Richard> Here's (what the ITU claims is) the specific proposal that
   Richard> has been made to the ITU: " An ITU spokesman said: "The  
ITU

   Richard> has no plans to modify the BGP protocol, which is not an
   Richard> ITU-T standard.  "A proposal has been made, and is being
   Richard> studied, to use BGP routers to collect traffic flow data,
   Richard> which could be used, by bilateral agreement, by operators
   Richard> for billing purposes."

   Richard> "

   Richard> Is this disingenuous or has the ITU really not heard of
   Richard> netflow?

What's so bogus about wanting to charge for traffic?


Where I would raise a flag is, charge whom ?

This sounds very much like the way that international long distance  
used to be done. That the Internet does not support that is to me, at  
least, not a bug but a very desirable feature.


Marshall



 I mean you might
not want to have your traffic go somewhere where it's going to be
expensive, but governments have been charging for and taxing things  
for

a long time.

If the technical details of how to accomplish this are bogus (and
changing BGP to include flow data would be), then perhaps that  
should be
fixed.  However judging something on all the things a spokesperson  
says

it is *not* seems counter productive.



___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Patrik Fältström]

On 18 dec 2009, at 17.19, Sam Hartman wrote:

> What's so bogus about wanting to charge for traffic?


Not bogus at all.

But, there is a big difference between having A Country asking for agreed upon 
settlement structures and the current structure where the peers negotiate how 
the money is to flow. I.e. I do not personally think it would be good for the 
Internet of today to have fixed settlement structures. The changes in flow, 
traffic pattern etc will make it completely impossible to find a mechanism that 
"works".

  Patrik

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Sam Hartman]

> "Richard" == Richard L Barnes  writes:

Richard> Here's (what the ITU claims is) the specific proposal that
Richard> has been made to the ITU: " An ITU spokesman said: "The ITU
Richard> has no plans to modify the BGP protocol, which is not an
Richard> ITU-T standard.  "A proposal has been made, and is being
Richard> studied, to use BGP routers to collect traffic flow data,
Richard> which could be used, by bilateral agreement, by operators
Richard> for billing purposes."

Richard> "

Richard> Is this disingenuous or has the ITU really not heard of
Richard> netflow?

What's so bogus about wanting to charge for traffic?  I mean you might
not want to have your traffic go somewhere where it's going to be
expensive, but governments have been charging for and taxing things for
a long time.

If the technical details of how to accomplish this are bogus (and
changing BGP to include flow data would be), then perhaps that should be
fixed.  However judging something on all the things a spokesperson says
it is *not* seems counter productive.
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Florian Weimer]

* Stephane Bortzmeyer:

> "Today, Internet is completely rotten", says Jacques Myard. "We have
> to nationalize this network, as the Chinese did." 

FWIW, Germany has got an established legal framework for covert
keyword-based screening on all international data links.

-- 
Florian Weimer
BFK edv-consulting GmbH   http://www.bfk.de/
Kriegsstraße 100  tel: +49-721-96201-1
D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-721-96201-99
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Stephane Bortzmeyer]

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 07:24:43AM -0800,
 Ole Jacobsen  wrote 
 a message of 34 lines which said:

> Chinese proposal to meter Internet traffic
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8417680.stm

In France (translated by me):

http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/actualites/politique/20091217.OBS1017/un_depute_ump_propose_de_nationaliser_le_reseau_interne.html

A member of parliament (UMP, the party of the president) wants to
nationalize Internet

"Today, Internet is completely rotten", says Jacques Myard. "We have
to nationalize this network, as the Chinese did." 

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Stephane Bortzmeyer]

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 10:39:03AM -0500,
 Richard L. Barnes  wrote 
 a message of 74 lines which said:

> Is this disingenuous or has the ITU really not heard of netflow?

This is the IETF, use RFC 5101 instead :-)
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Dave CROCKER]

On 12/18/2009 7:34 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:

The move would require international agreement - but it is being
discussed by the United Nations body in charge of internet standards.



Are they referring to the ITU ?


Yes, however:


"An ITU spokesman said: "The ITU has no plans to modify the BGP
protocol, which is not an ITU-T standard."


and the article's explicit reference to the IETF makes clear that the article 
isn't clear about basic details.


d/

--

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Ole Jacobsen]

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Marshall Eubanks wrote:

> > The move would require international agreement - but it is being
> > discussed by the United Nations body in charge of internet standards.
> >
> 
> Are they referring to the ITU ?

Yes. The ITU-T which is "the United Nations body in charge of internet 
standards." We have a standards body, they have a standards body...

I think we should be happy that they have no plans to modify BGP :-)

Ole

> 
> Marshall
> 

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Richard L. Barnes]

Here's (what the ITU claims is) the specific proposal that has been  
made to the ITU:

"
An ITU spokesman said: "The ITU has no plans to modify the BGP  
protocol, which is not an ITU-T standard.
"A proposal has been made, and is being studied, to use BGP routers to  
collect traffic flow data, which could be used, by bilateral  
agreement, by operators for billing purposes."


"

Is this disingenuous or has the ITU really not heard of netflow?

--Richard





On Dec 18, 2009, at 10:34 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:



On Dec 18, 2009, at 10:24 AM, Ole Jacobsen wrote:



(except it's not a joke)


Chinese proposal to meter Internet traffic

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8417680.stm

China wants to meter all internet traffic that passes through its
borders, it has emerged.

The move would require international agreement - but it is being
discussed by the United Nations body in charge of internet standards.



Are they referring to the ITU ?

Marshall




"An ITU spokesman said: "The ITU has no plans to modify the BGP
protocol, which is not an ITU-T standard."



Ole

Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj


___
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

Re: Most bogus news story of the week

[Marshall Eubanks]

On Dec 18, 2009, at 10:24 AM, Ole Jacobsen wrote:



(except it's not a joke)


Chinese proposal to meter Internet traffic

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8417680.stm

China wants to meter all internet traffic that passes through its
borders, it has emerged.

The move would require international agreement - but it is being
discussed by the United Nations body in charge of internet standards.



Are they referring to the ITU ?

Marshall




"An ITU spokesman said: "The ITU has no plans to modify the BGP
protocol, which is not an ITU-T standard."



Ole

Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj


___
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

Most bogus news story of the week

[Ole Jacobsen]

(except it's not a joke)


Chinese proposal to meter Internet traffic

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8417680.stm

China wants to meter all internet traffic that passes through its 
borders, it has emerged.

The move would require international agreement - but it is being 
discussed by the United Nations body in charge of internet standards. 



"An ITU spokesman said: "The ITU has no plans to modify the BGP 
protocol, which is not an ITU-T standard."



Ole

Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: o...@cisco.com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj


___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

reminder about BOF proposals

[Jari Arkko]

This is an early reminder that if you are planning to submit a BOF 
proposal for the next IETF meeting, its time to start acting. The 
requests must be submitted in little over five weeks. Or six weeks if 
you do it in UTC time, but I think that is an error on the web site :-) 
Of course, much of the real work needs to happen before submitting a 
request -- writing Internet Drafts, working on a charter proposal, 
having a list discussion with the interested parties, etc. Also, the ADs 
would like to know if you are thinking of something, as early as 
possible. Talk to your ADs.


http://www.ietf.org/meeting/cutoff-dates-2010.html#IETF77 says:

2010-01-25 (Monday): Cutoff date for BOF proposal requests to Area 
Directors at 17:00 PST (01:00 Tuesday, February 2 UTC). To request a 
BOF, please see instructions on Requesting a BOF
2010-02-08 (Monday): Cutoff date for Area Directors to approve BOFs at 
17:00 PST (01:00 Tuesday, February 9 UTC).


Jari

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: [rfc-i] Important: do not publish "draft-iab-streams-headers-boilerplates-08" as is!

[Julian Reschke]

Julian Reschke wrote:

Bob Braden wrote:

Jim,

Understood, but the RFC Editor does care how it flows.  We would like to 
get it as nearly right as possible, going out of the gate.


Bob Braden
...


For tracking purposes, I just published draft-reschke-hab-00 
(), which 
contains the headers and boilerplates for the 19 cases Sandy has 
identified. Note that the contents for these cases is auto-generated by 
the experimental version of rfc2629.xslt.


I plan to update rfc2629.xslt and this draft as the RFC Editor 
fine-tunes the text for draft-iab-streams-headers-boilerplates. This 
will give us easy-to-read diffs on tools.ietf.org.

...


In the meantime, draft-iab-streams-headers-boilerplates is in AUTH48, 
and I have updated my document with the current changes; see 
, in particular 
 (change 
list) and  
(diffs).


Best regards, Julian
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf