Re: When should a new IANA registry be created

If there is something in an RFC that clearly is "a parameter", then it is not a bad idea to have an IANA registry. By creating a registry, you can yourself set the requirements for assignment. For example, is an RFC needed? Is IESG approval needed? Is just review on a mailing list (and an exper

Re: List of Old Standards to be retired

Eliot Lear wrote: If you see a document on the list below and you know it to be in use, would you please reply to this message indicating the RFC number, and whether you believe the doc should be advanced beyond proposed? Also, if you know of work to update anything on the list below, please in

Re: [newtrk] List of Old Standards to be retired

> "William" == William Allen Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: William> John C Klensin wrote: >> Then these need the "bad" designation, not just the "not really >> interesting any more" one. And that, presumably, requires a >> "1828/1829 considered harmful" document, or at l

Re: [Old-standards] Re: [newtrk] List of Old Standards to be retired

> "John" == John C Klensin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: John> Harald, John> Sorry, but I've got a procedural problem with this. I-Ds John> can't obsolete anything, even I-Ds approved by the IESG. John> While "fiddle with the RFC Editor note in the John> announcement..." ma

Re: Draft version of the IAD job announcement from the IASA TT

I also agree. If we are looking for an executive-level person capable of serving as top-level management for a multi-million dollar activity, I think that a professional executive search would be worthwhile. Margaret At 5:23 PM -0500 12/19/04, Scott Bradner wrote: jck sed: Personally, I think I

Re: Draft version of the IAD job announcement from the IASA TT

I have no objection to having a professional look over the job description. That is probably a good idea. A full professional search is in my opinion not warranted or useful. I have worked with a number of executive search firms on senior level searches. They are very useful if what you want

Re: Draft version of the IAD job announcement from the IASA TT

jck sed: > Personally, I think I'd be happier with a > professionally-conducted search, but YMMD (and probably does). I agree (fwiw) I suggested directly to the IASA TT but did not get a positive respose so I'll suggest here - I'd sure like to have a professional in the field of looking for peo

Re: Draft version of the IAD job announcement from the IASA TT

Harald, Perhaps I'm the only one for whom the schedule on this has prevented comments: the IETF is not my full-time job and other priorities took over the last week or two. But I have finally had the opportunity to browse through the comments today. I find most of them interesting and helpfu

Re: [newtrk] Re: Historic (Re: List of Old Standards to be retired)

--On Sunday, December 19, 2004 12:39 PM +0100 Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --On lørdag, desember 18, 2004 11:51:56 -0800 Bob Braden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: *> >> *> > This must be some new redefinition of the meaning of a Historic RFC. *> > In the past, it meant "

RE: New Last Call: 'Tags for Identifying Languages' to BCP

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Brian Rosen wrote: I don't have any comment on the issue of language tags, but speaking as a reasonably avid ABNF hacker, I agree with Sam, and would not want to establish a convention that ABNF in IETF RFCs is expected to be precise. The counter-argument is the all-too-frequen

When should a new IANA registry be created

There is the beginning of yet another debate on the SIMPLE mailing list about do we need an IANA registry from some fields in a specific draft. There does not seem to be a clear opinion on when to create a registry or not and past activities are not 100% consistent. I'm sure this has come up many

Re: Historic (Re: List of Old Standards to be retired)

--On lørdag, desember 18, 2004 11:51:56 -0800 Bob Braden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: *> >> *> > This must be some new redefinition of the meaning of a Historic RFC. *> > In the past, it meant "don't do it this way anymore, we no longer *> > recommend it, there's another way to accomplish

Re: IASA BCP -02 Designated Donations - section 5.3

Ted Hardie wrote: At 12:12 PM -0500 12/17/04, Leslie Daigle wrote: Brian, I agree, with respect to the specifics (as I said in my note). However, a principle should be captured. And, to the extent we do not yet (apparently) have general agreement on the principle, we still have work to do. Though,

Re: Why old-standards (Re: List of Old Standards to be retired)

--On lørdag, desember 18, 2004 13:04:52 -0500 William Allen Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So, here's my promise to you. I'll track down McGregor, and we'll write something up. I will work on moving my Proposed Standards, assuming that the IESG is actually _interested_ in doing its job. Th

Re: Draft version of the IAD job announcement from the IASA TT

Brian, Avri, Allison, Spencer and Adrian: Thank you for your feedback! Kurtis is off on holidays now, so I'll be taking on the job of integrating your comments with the text of the announcement. We're aiming to get it out on Monday (Friday proved over-ambitious). Thanks again!