Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> I'm told that my recollection is faulty
It's not, that breach of RfC 2418 chapter 4
caused two of the three pending appeals.
Bye, Frank
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/l
At 19:50 31/10/2005, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
But what doesn't help us get on with our work here is discursive
decision of vaguely defined societal or cultural implications.
That's what I was getting at.
Dear Brian,
full agreement. Describing this way the key societal matters at hand
certainl
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Sam Hartman wrote:
...
A ticket requesting closure of a working group includes a few things:
1) the working group being closed. High dissatisfaction has resulted
in the past when the wrong working group is closed.
2) Additional comments to be included in the WG c
[typo corrected to restore meaning]
Steve (and Ned),
Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brian E Carpenter writes:
Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brian E Carpenter writes:
Eduardo Mendez wrote:
What IETF discuss may hurt thir people, p
Sam Hartman wrote:
...
A ticket requesting closure of a working group includes a few things:
1) the working group being closed. High dissatisfaction has resulted
in the past when the wrong working group is closed.
2) Additional comments to be included in the WG closure message.
3) Whethe
Steve (and Ned),
Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brian E Carpenter writes:
Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brian E Carpenter writes:
Eduardo Mendez wrote:
What IETF discuss may hurt thir people, peace, culture.
But I am sure IETF Mem
Alper Yegin wrote:
- is the IETF community interested in discussions about the social
implications of the technology we develop
I think this is very interesting.
- is the IETF general list the right place for those discussions.
Is it too late to arrange a BoF meeting at IETF 64?
Yes, s
Mr. Chair,
2005/10/29, Brian E Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Eduardo Mendez wrote:
> > I understand why IETF fears local governments for their meetings.
>
> I simply do not understand this statement. The IETF has no
> concerns about governments, and we often have people in government
> service
Avri,
Interestingly enough, assuming there was such a separate
list - say with ISOC - how would anyone be able to know that it
exists and is the appropriate place to post such comments? Also,
how would the average IETF WG participant know to look through
the archives for such a list if the
--- Begin Message ---
Hi. As people may be aware there is a pesci bof discussing principles
and next steps for process change. It is currently scheduled
Wednesday before the plenary but conclusions of the BOF are to be
presented in the plenary. That's not much time. I'm proposing a late
swap of
10 matches
Mail list logo
