Phill,
As a result the IETF is a standards body with 2000 active participants that
produces on average less than 3 standards a year
and typically takes ten years to produce even a specification.
It is well understood that the Internet mainly runs on Proposed Standards,
so the appropriate
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Phill,
As a result the IETF is a standards body with 2000 active
participants that produces on average less than 3 standards a year
and typically takes ten years to produce even a specification.
It is well understood that the Internet mainly runs on Proposed
At 09:09 18/09/2006, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Phill,
As a result the IETF is a standards body with 2000 active
participants that produces on average less than 3 standards a year
and typically takes ten years to produce even a specification.
It is well understood that the Internet mainly runs
On 9/18/06, Eliot Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have not done the work to review velocity from -00 to RFC, but perhaps
Bill Fenner has.
I haven't; I've been concentrating on the IESG part of the document lifecycle.
Bill
___
Ietf mailing list
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 10:16:11AM -0700, todd glassey wrote:
For instance - would Harald H ever let me run an initiative through IPR? -
not a chance and his refusal to allow me to file my drafts under his WG is a
violation of the IETF charter, and tortuous interference by he and the IESG
to
Jefsey_Morfin wrote:
The Internet has dramatically increased this to the point we
have accepted it as a virtual and a global world, i.e. a
conceptual and geographical equivalent coverage to reality.
The IETF is therefore in the core of this
But not alone, googlebot, wikipedia, and some other
Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
[..]
Campaigns can be a pain, but they do have positive attributes. People
who have to campaign for a position are forced to think about the
contribution they intend to make, they have to set out a program of
action, they have to communicate it to the
On 9/18/06, Hallam-Baker, Phillip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Let's see - HTTP/1.1 was published as Proposed Standard in
January 1997, and draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-00.txt was posted
in November 1995.
The first drafts of the spec were
Robert Sayre [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thankfully, the complete failure known as HTTP 1.1 would never make it
to Proposed Standard under the unwritten process we have now. For
example, it doesn't contain a mandatory, universally interoperable
authentication feature.
That's right, it doesn't,
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'ENUM Validation Architecture '
draft-ietf-enum-validation-arch-04.txt as an Informational RFC
This document is the product of the Telephone Number Mapping Working
Group.
The IESG contact persons are Jon Peterson and Cullen Jennings.
A URL
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Using OpenPGP keys for TLS authentication '
draft-ietf-tls-openpgp-keys-11.txt as an Experimental RFC
This document is the product of the Transport Layer Security Working
Group.
The IESG contact persons are Russ Housley and Sam Hartman.
A
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Desired Enhancements to GSSAPI Version 3 Naming '
draft-ietf-kitten-gss-naming-05.txt as an Informational RFC
This document is the product of the Kitten (GSS-API Next Generation)
Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Russ Housley and
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'GMPLS - Communication of Alarm Information '
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec-06.txt as a Proposed Standard
This document is the product of the Common Control and Measurement Plane
Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Ross Callon and
13 matches
Mail list logo
