On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 09:44:12AM -0700, todd glassey wrote:
BRIAN - you have totally missed the point - No offense meant, but
your personal word nor any other IETF/IESG staff member is what is not to
be relied on - whether you are telling the truth or not is irrelevant - the
process has a
Dave Crocker wrote:
...
First you focused on ambiguity, when that seems pretty clearly not to
be the issue -- although I note that you have not responded to that
observation.
IMHO RFC3777, like most RFCs, contains ambiguity, imprecision
and gaps. That's why we revise RFCs from time to time,
Why cant the IETF and IESG Embrace open elections rather than the
technological version of the Electoral College its tried to put in place
with NOMCOM
Todd
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- Original Message -
From: Brian E Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Dave Crocker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 1:51 AM
Subject: Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process
Dave Crocker wrote:
...
First you focused on ambiguity, when that seems pretty
- Original Message -
From: Theodore Tso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: todd glassey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Brian E Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: Crisis of Faith - was Re: Adjusting the Nomcom process
On Sun, Sep 10, 2006
From: todd glassey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why cant the IETF and IESG Embrace open elections
Because the members are generally happy with the system we have now. It's
called democracy - and you're outvoted.
Remember, we had this system for quite a while before the last major rework
of the
Todd,
As one of the randoms (and speaking for nobody but myself)...
The facts remain - most IETF WG participants have no idea what is going on
here - and that is not their fault - its the fault of the design of the IETF
Personally I've no huge problem with the nomcom.
However, if you feel
Bill - I think the IETF has tried to for years claim it has no members and
that simply isn't true - and I can arrange to have a Judge tell you and the
IETF that if you like.
The fact is that this WG has a membership and is constructing IETF process
that effects all of the other WG's for which
Cool Rob - how about we ask ALL of the other members of all of the other
WG's since these rules and processes effect them.
- Original Message -
From: Rob Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: todd glassey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org; Noel Chiappa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September
todd glassey wrote:
was this existence of the IPR or IETF WG disclosed to anyone
There is no IETF WG, this is the general list of the general
area. And yes, somebody told me where to post IPR WG related
issues when I tried it here.
is there anything on the Website that talks about the
Bill
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: todd glassey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 9:48 AM
Subject: Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than
some
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 09:36:38AM -0700,
I have - and whether it was true in the past or not the IETF needs
something more - the Tao of the IETF is more about the members of the ruling
class and little else.
Todd
- Original Message -
From: Frank Ellermann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006
Pekka == Pekka Savola [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Pekka I'd be more than happy to support a move to ban Mr
Pekka Glassey. Is it time for a PR-action ?
I don't understand why RFC 3005 is insufficient.
There may also be a need for action in the ipr working group, but I'm
sure the chairs
Hi Ted -
I've tried to stay out of this, since there has been too much comment.
But, I'd like to amplify your point and some others I've heard.
1. I'm offended by Todd's repeated implication that Brian has lied
to the IETF. That is an ad hominen attack and goes well beyond
the stated purpose
IMHO, fighting the messenger is not the proper solution to the
problem.
The messenger accused the IETF chair of lying. That is totally
inappropriate behavior.
Carl
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Hi,
There is a new mailing list that anyone can join in order to receive
advance notice of the upcoming IESG agenda. One week before each official
IESG teleconference, the draft agenda will be sent to this list, once as
an ASCII message and once as an HTML message containing relevant links.
This
Sometimes people send IETF email with attached legal disclaimers,
usually inserted automatically by their employer's mail system.
These disclaimers make assertions about confidentiality and may contain
phrases like If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any
disclosure, copying,
The IESG has approved the following documents:
- 'Definitions of Textual Conventions for Generalized Multiprotocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Management '
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-11.txt as a Proposed Standard
- 'Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering
18 matches
Mail list logo
