Let me see:
1) you don't want to read the wg mailing list
yup, because early participation on the list and in the BOFs convinced
me it was not a good use of my time. Beating my head against the wall
isn't my idea of fun.
2) you don't want to have issues opened up on the issue tracker
I'
Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
Who does or will pay for the
IANA function? Does funding come from IASA, ICANN, or some other
source?
Ray Pelletier wrote:
To my knowledge, it's ICANN, not the IETF.
Ray
Brian E Carpenter wrote
Yes, this has been an ICANN contribution to the community since
the crea
Keith Moore wrote:
I am still waiting to see a description of the defects you believe that you
have identified in either forum. I have asked you to describe them here several
times, you have refused.
And I've already partially explained why I'm not doing things that
way. But in additio
> From: Keith Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> And furthermore, because of the I-D cutoff and my travel
> schedule you won't see any I-D until early August at the earliest.
Do you plan to do that before or after the working group last call?
I doubt that your travel schedule is a quarter as
> And everyone else has pointed out 'there is a problem here but I am not going
> to tell you what it is' is not a useful mode of discourse.
Ah, but I *am* going to describe what the problems are. I'm just not
going to describe what the problems are in a way that makes it as easy
for people to d
> From: Keith Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > I am still waiting to see a description of the defects you
> believe that you have identified in either forum. I have
> asked you to describe them here several times, you have refused.
>
> And I've already partially explained why I'm not doing
> I am still waiting to see a description of the defects you believe that you
> have identified in either forum. I have asked you to describe them here
> several times, you have refused.
And I've already partially explained why I'm not doing things that
way. But in addition to that - mailing li
> >And you're not just one voice, you are one of the document authors.
>
> No he isn't.
I stand corrected. Too much history between me and Dave, I suppose.
> Thus far, I see a huge amount of effort on your part at making disparaging
> oblique remarks with no substance that anybody could act o
> From: Keith Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> No, Dave, you insisted on interrupting me and shouting me
> down when I tried to raise these issues in the BOFs - doing
> your best to prevent me from making my case. And you're not
> just one voice, you are one of the document authors.
>
>
Keith Moore wrote:
No, Dave, you insisted on interrupting me and shouting me down when I tried
to raise these issues in the BOFs - doing your best to prevent me from making
my case.
We had three bof's, and Dave was a chair of bof #2 only.
And you're not just one voice, you are one of the do
> From: Jeffrey Hutzelman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > I do think that there should be a fixed rule prohibiting members of
> > the IESG being WG chairs. I would also include the IETF
> chair in this.
>
> I don't. While I agree this should be a rare occurrance, I
> have seen no evidence of a
No, Dave, you insisted on interrupting me and shouting me down when I tried
to raise these issues in the BOFs - doing your best to prevent me from making
my case. And you're not just one voice, you are one of the document authors.
As for rough consensus, you seem to forget that there are two ne
On Wednesday, June 28, 2006 09:45:27 AM -0700 "Hallam-Baker, Phillip"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I do not think it would be a good thing to make it an inviolate rule that
a chair can never be an editor.
Nor do I.
I do think that there should be a fixed rule prohibiting members of the
IE
> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > This is exactly my take as well. I've seen many cases where a chair
> > has refused to become a document author or editor in a
> group because
> > of the conflict it creates. I've also seen at least one
> case where a
> > chair stepped
Ned Freed wrote:
I think that the single change most likely to keep WGs on track is to ensure
that they do not have a single dominant participant, eg one who is both chair
and
author of key I-Ds. The WGs I see most at risk of going round in circles and/or
producing output that falls short of wh
How is this event related to the IETF? This is the third e-mail I've
seen to ietf@ietf.org about this event, but I have yet to figure out how
it's related. Can you please clarify the connection for me?
[YJS] Maybe it is in response to the thread about graphics in RFCs :->
___
>> My recollection is that every issue raised, by anyone, got considered.
>
> Well, you kept claiming that we couldn't possibly anticipate the ways in
> which the DKIM protocol would be used, therefore there was no
> justification for the WG to change DKIM significantly from its original
> desig
In order to increase the efficiency of the work in the CAPWAP Working
Group (http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/capwap-charter.html), and in
order to accelerate the consensus process in the Working Group, the Area
Directors decided to create a third co-chair position for the CAPWAP WG.
The ADs ha
Eliot Lear wrote:
> Can be found at http://www.ofcourseimright.com/pages/lear/ietf66.ics.
>
>
Finally I can use something like this. Got Mozilla Calendar running and
imported directly from the URL.
Thanks Eliot!
> Usual disclaimers apply. May harm small children and animals, etc...
>
None
Harald Alvestrand wrote:
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Ray Pelletier wrote:
Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
Who does or will pay for the IANA function? Does funding come from
IASA, ICANN, or some other source?
To my knowledge, it's ICANN, not the IETF.
Ray
Yes, this has been an ICANN contribu
Having a more formal description of state machines is a natural next
step from having, say, a good syntax description in ABNF.
Unfortunately, unlike ABNF, none of these (except SDL) have a long-
term stable reference. If we worry about PDF not being around for
future RFC readers, I am a bit
Dave Cridland wrote:
> It's sometimes difficult to find the drafts you could comment on as
> they're produced, especially if you're not part of the WG, and it's
> also tricky to find the background to some of the decisions.
>
> It's fustrating, too, to have issues which are brought up continuously
I can understand that you may be reluctant to dive back in having
seen the WG formed but I think "not listening" isn't really correct.
Maybe you meant "didn't listen"?
Even if that's what he really meant, it is not correct.
My recollection is that every issue raised, by anyone, got considered.
On Jun 27, 2006, at 8:48 PM, Keith Moore wrote:
I also believe that creating an authentication system that favors
large domains over small ones, and inflexible signing policy over
flexible signing policy, is bad for society. The trick is getting
a balance between these. Some of my conce
On one minor note...
Tables are a possible solution (if the machine is finite). But most
people find them too low-level.
I have just returned from about three days of fairly intense conversations
about one of our current BOF topics, that
- would have been a lot easier to have, if the use ca
There have been a lot of talk here recently about the "need" to allow
something more than US-ASCII (and some people require even more than
raw text) in the RFCs.
A common "use case" is the need to specify state machines. This is
often done by a drawing (sometimes in ASCII-art or may be in
Unicode-
Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
If we are going to do anything about the pedophile predators lurking in
Internet chat rooms we have to create the understanding that there is
accountability. The perverts would not approach a minor in a public area with
the type of advance they use in a chat room,
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Ray Pelletier wrote:
Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
Who does or will pay for the IANA function? Does funding come from
IASA, ICANN, or some other source?
To my knowledge, it's ICANN, not the IETF.
Ray
Yes, this has been an ICANN contribution to the community since
th
28 matches
Mail list logo
