On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 11:05:35AM -0700,
Bob Braden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 31 lines which said:
[Of course, when the IAOC outsources the RFC Editor to India in
2009,
Good idea. May be the indians will process the errata in time?
On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 05:51:21PM +0200,
Arnt Gulbrandsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 21 lines which said:
Five days in Minneapolis
I thought we did not want to have meetings in dangerous places like
Paris or Rio?
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/08/01/bridge.witness.ap/
We've got an IAD, whose responsibility it is to check that contractors
(YES, there were contractors, not just volunteers, involved in the
network setup) do what they contracted to do.
I'm sure he knows enough to ask for help in evaluating the answer, if he
doesn't understand it.
Asking
Hi Peter,
--On July 30, 2007 2:11:38 PM -0600 Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Further, in-person meetings are so second-millennium. How about greater
use of text chat, voice chat, and video chat for interim meetings? Are
three in-person meetings a year really necessary if we make
-- Original message --
From: John C Klensin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--On Tuesday, 31 July, 2007 01:23 -0400 Jeffrey Altman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The notion that NomCom eligibility should be determined by
those who attend meetings just doesn't make a lot
On 2007-08-01 21:01, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Wednesday, 01 August, 2007 09:03 -0700 David W. Hankins
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
This is also just another version of the eat our own dogfood
story: if we don't find the dogfood palatable --whether because
of its basic specification or its
David W. Hankins wrote:
I certainly would say that, given what we can observe as users, the
possible explanations for the DNS and DHCP service outages reside in
a _very_ limited set; hardware, software, configuration, or some
combination.
None of those are IETF business in the sense of
..
I think we've seen several examples of where the IETF has spent
significant amount of energy, ranging from heated discussions to
specification work, on solutions that simply won't fly. It would be
useful if that energy waste could be reduced. Having 'running
code' as
a barrier for
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 03:01:40PM -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
I think you misunderstand my comment, or at least its intent.
I absolutely did, but I think reasonably so. This version is no
longer crazy, even noble.
But I'm not sold on it.
Or do you still think we disagree or that my
Lixia Zhang wrote:
..
I think we've seen several examples of where the IETF has spent
significant amount of energy, ranging from heated discussions to
specification work, on solutions that simply won't fly. It would be
useful if that energy waste could be reduced. Having 'running code' as
Lixia Zhang wrote:
..
I think we've seen several examples of where the IETF has spent
significant amount of energy, ranging from heated discussions to
specification work, on solutions that simply won't fly. It would be
useful if that energy waste could be reduced. Having 'running
code'
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 11:55:12AM -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
DHCP, in particular, strikes me as a nightmare - a hodgepodge of
unrelated attributes, many of which have no business being dictated to
hosts by the network. gluing DHCP to DNS creates another set of
problems, also based on dubious
David Conrad wrote:
I'd offer that the OSI protocol stack was probably significantly more
reviewed than the TCP/IP stack.
Depends what you mean by more reviewed.
More eyes looking at the specs? Probably yes. More critical analysis by
senior technical architects? Probably not.
At the
The metric system has been legal in the US since 1895 when the US agreed
to adopt it in exchange for France agreeing to Greenwich, England, for
the Prime Meridian.
Donald
-Original Message-
From: Douglas Otis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 2:17 PM
To: John C
yes!
I tried to resist the 47th rehash of this thread, but... too late...
Within a commercial environment, the organization has to be
fairly convinced that their better mousetrap is going to work,
in order to fund it, productize it, document it, sell it, and support it.
This process will
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
1. The fact that the network is expected to be shaken down within
hours instead of progressively over some large number of days.
It goes from small scale test to full load in about 24 hours.
That argues for re-using venues known to work well and, of course, keeping
Bob Hinden wrote:
It was also interesting to open the Mac network control pannel, enable
my Airport (WLAN) interface, and see the IPv6 global address appear
almost instantaneously and in many case having to wait many seconds to
minutes for DHCP provided IPv4 address to appear.
Any chance
On 2-aug-2007, at 21:17, Dave Crocker wrote:
It was also interesting to open the Mac network control pannel,
enable my Airport (WLAN) interface, and see the IPv6 global
address appear almost instantaneously and in many case having to
wait many seconds to minutes for DHCP provided IPv4
Iljitsch == Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Iljitsch On 2-aug-2007, at 21:17, Dave Crocker wrote:
It was also interesting to open the Mac network control
pannel, enable my Airport (WLAN) interface, and see the IPv6
global address appear almost instantaneously
Are we certain that an IP address is not property? We can state that it is not
the case but such statements do not necessarily have the intended effect.
The only way to be sure would be to do something silly and see what the result
of the lawsuit is. For example we could decide to cancel the
On 3-aug-2007, at 0:46, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
I expect the market in IPv4 addresses to trace the following pattern
If you would have cared to quote properly and thus read the previous
message you'd have seen that ARIN doesn't want to allow an address
market. Since they are the ones
On Aug 2, 2007, at 4:27 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
NAT isn't the only answer to the question I can't get IPv4
addresses, what do I do? Using IPv6 and a proxy to reach the IPv4
world is much, much cleaner. And it also works from v4 to v6. We
really should start advocating this as the
NAT isn't the only answer to the question I can't get IPv4 addresses,
what do I do? Using IPv6 and a proxy to reach the IPv4 world is much,
much cleaner. And it also works from v4 to v6. We really should start
advocating this as the preferred transition mechanism.
NAT and proxies are not
Total of 151 messages in the last 7 days.
script run at: Fri Aug 3 00:53:01 EDT 2007
Messages | Bytes| Who
+--++--+
5.30% |8 | 9.67% |90709 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
6.62% | 10 | 5.54% |52016 | [EMAIL
The IESG has received a request from the Common Control and Measurement
Plane WG (ccamp) to consider the following document:
- 'Inter domain Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized
MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering - RSVP-TE extensions '
The IESG has received a request from the Common Control and Measurement
Plane WG (ccamp) to consider the following document:
- 'A Per-domain path computation method for establishing Inter-domain
Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) '
The IESG has received a request from the Common Control and Measurement
Plane WG (ccamp) to consider the following document:
- 'Label Switched Path Stitching with Generalized Multiprotocol Label
Switching Traffic Engineering (GMPLS TE) '
draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-stitching-06.txt as a Proposed
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 4950
Title: ICMP Extensions for Multiprotocol Label
Switching
Author: R. Bonica, D. Gan,
D. Tappan, C. Pignataro
Status:
28 matches
Mail list logo
