Re: Friday @ IETF61?

On Thursday, 2 Sep 2004, George Michaelson wrote: I call again for meetings run over the weekend. midweek to midweek. There's been a number of comments for and against this proposal. To get some numbers on this, it would be good if those for which it matters whether the meetings run

POLL: IETFs Sunday-Friday or Thursday-Tuesday

On Thursday, 2 Sep 2004, George Michaelson wrote: I call again for meetings run over the weekend. midweek to midweek. There's been a number of comments for and against this proposal. To get some numbers on this, it would be good if those for which it matters whether the meetings run

Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring)

Harald wrote... Foretec has paid employees doing the secretariat job. One of the transparency problems can be seen at https://www1.ietf.org/secretariat.html The Secretariat is hosted by the Corporation for National Research Initiatives. It can be reached at: IETF

Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring

For what it's worth I feel about the same way that Brian does about the restructuring options. I think that both options A B make sense, could be done quickly and would be a positive step in regularizing the relationship of the IETF to its admin functions. Both options provide a way for the

A different cut [was Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring]

Here's my *personal* perspective on reviewing the scenarios Carl's laid out. By my reading, Scenario A says: an existing organization, ISOC, will bear the responsibility for the administrative support of the IETF, as an extension of its existing commitment to the IETF. Scenario B says: Scenario

NomCom 2004/05 Call for Volunteers

This is a call for volunteers to participate in the 2004/05 IETF Nominations Committee, the committee that will select this year's nominees for the IAB and IESG. Details about the Nominations Committee process can be found in RFC 3777. The NomCom is the IETF's way of choosing its leadership.

RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring

Scott writes: ... snip ... I think that option C brings little useful to the table. I fail to see that incorporating the organizer of the IETF admin functions solves any existing problem that is not better and more easily solved by options A or B. Option C mostly adds the complication and

RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring

Bert, et al., Thanks for your note. I too have watched the evolution of the relationship with CNRI for a long time. I served on the IESG from 1989 to 1994 when Phill gross was the IETF chair, and I served on the IAB for another two years. I co-chaired the POISED working group which reorganized

Core Problems/First Principles (was: Options for IETF administrative restructuring)

Hi All, Like most people who have been involved in these discussions over the past couple of years, I have my own personal views on the core problems facing the IETF's administrative support functions and what we should do to resolve them. As we have worked through these issues, it has become

NomCom 2004/05 Call for Volunteers

This is a call for volunteers to participate in the 2004/05 IETF Nominations Committee, the committee that will select this year's nominees for the IAB and IESG. Details about the Nominations Committee process can be found in RFC 3777. The NomCom is the IETF's way of choosing its leadership.

Last Call: 'DNS Security Introduction and Requirements' to Proposed Standard

The IESG has received a request from the DNS Extensions WG to consider the following documents: - 'Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security Extensions ' draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-protocol-07.txt as a Proposed Standard - 'DNS Security Introduction and Requirements '