Re: tools everywhere (was Daily Dose version 2 launched

John C Klensin wrote: what is key is not having to do a lot of navigation, involving loading and examining multiple pages (_especially_ if those pages are slow) to get to things that are in the critical path of doing work. I suspect the current problem is due to an organizing approach th

Re: Daily Dose version 2 launched

On 2007-Nov-3, at 10:02 , Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: Not counting pictures (I think); neither one is "big" by today's standards, but still... If I'm accessing those pages via GPRS (I'm on Fido in Canada) I pay five cents per kilobyte for data. So, it costs me $1.65 to load .../ tools

Re: tools everywhere

John C Klensin wrote: > To me, the obvious simple solution to this is to keep one link > -- either as a bookmark or in my head -- that points to a list > of tools. My solution is a collection of my favourite tools on a public page . That turned out to be a go

Re: Daily Dose version 2 launched

I'm with John on this one. A site home page shouldn't be a newsfeed. (yes, I know, I'm an antediluvian.) minor fact: today, the tools.ietf.org/ page with news is 101 kbytes. The tools.ietf.org/tools page with tools is 33 kbytes. Not counting pictures (I think); neither one is "big" by today's sta

Re: tools everywhere (was Daily Dose version 2 launched

--On 2. november 2007 21:39 -0400 "Scott O. Bradner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: brian corrected: ID submission isn't at the tools server, it's at https://datatracker.ietf.org/idst/upload.cgi true but it shows my point as well why not www.ietf.org/id/submit "datatracker" is a meaningful

Re: tools everywhere (was Daily Dose version 2 launched

--On Saturday, 03 November, 2007 14:34 +1300 Brian E Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2007-11-03 09:48, Scott O. Bradner wrote: > ... >> why does "tools" have to show up in just about every IETF URL >> these days? >... >> www.ietf.org/id/submit >> www.ietf.org/nomcom/feedback

Re: 2026, draft, full, etc.

Almost makes one think that our standards labeling scheme needs some simplification. One might even imagine that the only label after Proposed should be one which means "is now in widespread use". So we would have Proposed mean "has undergone technical review" and Full means "has gained public

New IETF Journal available now

Hi all, The new issue of the IETF Journal - Volume 3, Issue 2 - is now available on http://ietfjournal.isoc.org Read this publication online or choose to download the full issue in PDF format. You can also keep up to date with the latest issue of the IETF Journal by subscribing to one of our RS