I can ask, but I doubt that this information is available. What I know
is that the registration fee for the IEEE 802 Plenary meeting is
considerably lower than the one at the IETF (300 USD vs. 500 USD).
Regards,
Dan
> -Original Message-
> From: Marshall Eubanks [mailto:[EMAIL PROT
On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 06:45:59 +0200
"Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
Dear Dan;
You should see if you can find out what it costs the IEEE 802
to outsource the wireless LAN, both total and per person.
Regards;
Marshall Eubanks
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 4:15 AM
> To: Ole Jacobsen
> Cc: ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Please make sure that you do not run your WLAN
> in ad hoc mode
>
>
>
> On 11 nov
On 11 nov 2005, at 13.56, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
In 19 days, this very hotel and meeting rooms will be filled with
ICANN
attendees, most of whom are not "technical" in our sense of the
word. That
should be lots of fun :-)
It will be interesting to see if ICANN has as much trouble, or IEEE
It's a design choice. We've already had some spam and unexpected
subscription attempts against the nomcom05 mailing list.
The messages are being approved within 12 hours.
- Ralph
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 08:08 -0800, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> Recent nominations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] have prompted resp
starting Thursday 3PM I stopped receiving messages from all ietf-
related mailing list. Turned out this was a result of
megatron.ietf.org getting on spamcop's black list. I doubt our dept
is the only place using spamcop's black list, wonder who else may be
missing email without knowing it.
Phillip Hallam-Baker writes...
> You sound like a 1950s British trades unionist calling his men out on
> strike over demarcation.
Insult me, if it makes you feel better. I stand by my advice.
This is a product usability problem, not a technical shortcoming of the
underlying standards. My obse
If the architecture profession carried on the way engineers do the world
would be full of buildings with no interior walls or floors.
You sound like a 1950s British trades unionist calling his men out on
strike over demarcation.
> -Original Message-
> From: Nelson, David [mailto:[EMAIL
Andrew Daviel wrote:
(resending this from my subscribed address... duh..)
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Bill Fenner wrote:
If people don't know how to turn off ad-hoc mode, will they know how
to check their MAC address against the list?
Maybe... I know very well how to check my MAC in my primary OS (
(resending this from my subscribed address... duh..)
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Bill Fenner wrote:
> If people don't know how to turn off ad-hoc mode, will they know how
> to check their MAC address against the list?
Maybe... I know very well how to check my MAC in my primary OS (Linux)
and (I think)
In 19 days, this very hotel and meeting rooms will be filled with ICANN
attendees, most of whom are not "technical" in our sense of the word. That
should be lots of fun :-)
I am sure they could use some volunteers if you feel like coming back.
Ole
Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher, The I
+ 1 to all of this. Seeing the slides for the WGs and BOFs I have
listened to this week has been *very* helpful. I noticed this even
more during SAAG yesterday when one speaker didn't have his slides
available, and those of us listening or following in Jabber were
completely lost.
Of course,
I think we can make a pretty good guess as to the list, although
maybe not the relative positions.
I think that from now on registration packets should include a sheet
about how to tell if you are
running an ad hoc network for a variety of OS flavors, and have sent
a detailed suggestion to
Maybe we can at least try to validate this theory by asking at the
plenary as to which operating system people are running.
Carsten Bormann wrote:
Guidelines would be nice, but wouldn't help here:
The evidence seems to identify systems as the culprits with operating
systems that have not been
Guidelines would be nice, but wouldn't help here:
The evidence seems to identify systems as the culprits with operating
systems that have not been upgraded in the last half-decade.
Those won't benefit from new information.
(I don't want to start discussion about the economic realities that
Dave Singer writes...
> Some testing and robustness guidelines from the 802.11 group
> would also help.
While you may believe that IEEE 802.11 should provide these services, I
will note that the Wi-Fi Alliance (WFA) currently fills that gap.
___
Ietf
At 11:44 -0500 11/11/05, Nelson, David wrote:
Phillip Hallam-Baker writes...
I think that what we should do is to send the IEEE 801.b/g group a
polite letter pointing out that if our people here at the IETF cannot
figure this stuff out then their less technically astute customers
might
b
Jordi,
We should ask the chairs to put the slides on the Meeting
Materials system (where they are available
to everyone outside and inside) at the time of the meeting,
if not before, now that the upload is so easy.
The Working Group Secretaries will get access to the
Meeting Materials system,
Hi,
I've heard from the people that is outside that the streaming is very
useful, but it will be even more if they can also have access to the slides.
I understand that is difficult to get the slides of everyone before the
meeting itself, but it should be very easy to centralize the slides in an
Phillip Hallam-Baker writes...
> I think that what we should do is to send the IEEE 801.b/g group a
> polite letter pointing out that if our people here at the IETF cannot
> figure this stuff out then their less technically astute customers
might
> be having some trouble as well.
I don't believe
Recent nominations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] have prompted responses
that "Your mail to 'Nomcom05' on the subject ... Is being held
by the list moderator subject to approval". Is this an intentional
design choice? Are the messages being approved?
-Ekr
___
Ie
I think that what we should do is to send the IEEE 801.b/g group a
polite letter pointing out that if our people here at the IETF cannot
figure this stuff out then their less technically astute customers might
be having some trouble as well.
I think that the cause of this 'misconfiguration' is sim
22 matches
Mail list logo
