Re: Lets be careful with those XML submissions to the RFC Editor

Ned Freed wrote: ... Another potential problem is that document generation from XML source may involve more than just running xml2rfc. Some documents are built up from multiple files in complex ways that cannot easily be duplicated by the I-D manager. ... That's true. But at some point of time,

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

Yangwoo Ko wrote: Well, I don't think that shuttle bus is an enough compromise. It is not flexible in scheduling and does not work late night. It occurs to me that a competent hotel normally comps the cost of the alternate room, if you arrive with a reservation and they fail to satisfy it

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

Well, I don't think that shuttle bus is an enough compromise. It is not flexible in scheduling and does not work late night. YAO wrote: +1 support. if so, shuttle should be provided. - Original Message - *From:* Yaakov Stein *To:* ietf@i

RE: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

Yaakov, I could be wrong but I was under the impression that the IETF was already providing a shuttle service as the Renaissance was the designated overflow hotel. Stuart Goldman Alcatel-Lucent [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 602 493 8438 P please save a tree by not printing this e-mail.

Re: Lets be careful with those XML submissions to the RFC Editor

agreed. at the risk of stating the obvious: the problem is identical to the one where the authors submit nroff source to the rfc-editor. it's always a good idea to run the toolchain, and then diff the text against the I-D approved by the IESG. if there's a difference, the relevant ADs and authors

IETF Hosting Opportunity - March 2009

Dear Colleagues- As you finalize your plans to attend IETF 70 in Vancouver next week, we wanted to make you aware of the opportunity for your organization to host IETF 74 in March 2009. The event is now planned to take place in North America, specific location still to be determined. Since the s

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

Fred Baker wrote: For the record, Ray was aware of this renovation, and tells us that there will be renovation ongoing in Philadelphia as well. Since a purpose of the long-term contract was stability, this is proving to be a rather counter-productive pattern. As for construction noise, i

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

Cullen Jennings wrote: We been at several hotels that are doing renovation during IETF and I don't think it was ever without problems. Humans do not process negatives all that well -- and that's a cognitive issue, not just emotional -- particularly when doubled. Besides, it's always

RE: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

> I will be certainly be writing letters to the Bayshore and their parent > company to express my displeasure, and I hope that the IETF will > remember this week's events the next time it considers holding a meeting > at a Starwood Hotel. and while we are at it... We will need cloak room service

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

>They offered to put me up in the Renaissance 5 blocks away, The ICANN meeting a couple of years ago was at the Bayshore, and I stayed at the Renaissance because the Bayshore was full. When we were there, the weather was unseasonably severe, with temperatures plunging below 0 C and snow blown int

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

+1 support. if so, shuttle should be provided. - Original Message - From: Yaakov Stein To: ietf@ietf.org Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 3:47 AM Subject: Westin Bayshore throwing us out The Westin Bayshore just called me to tell me that they are undergoing renovation

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Nov 27, 2007, at 3:08 PM, Cullen Jennings wrote: Fair enough, and I realize that I am not privy to how the negotiations go and how much of a discount one gets. I don't want to know about how the contracts negotiation happens but I do of cou

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Ray Pelletier wrote: I am told we are the only guests at the Westin. That would be surprising. The Westin Bayshore advertises 511 guest rooms (320 in the main building and 191 in the tower) [1]. According to the IETF hotel page, our block was only 425 rooms [2]. Assu

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

Fair enough, and I realize that I am not privy to how the negotiations go and how much of a discount one gets. I don't want to know about how the contracts negotiation happens but I do of course want to have a productive IETF meeting with as few late surprises as possible. On Nov 27, 2

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

Preliminary information is that there will shuttle service between the Renaissance, Marriott and Westin. Extent of impact on rooms about 50. I am told we are the only guests at the Westin. I will report back with additional info. Ray IAD Pete Resnick wrote: On 11/27/07 at 9:47 PM +0200,

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

Cullen Jennings wrote: > > On Nov 27, 2007, at 2:06 PM, Pete Resnick wrote: > >> Ray, I think you need to comment on this. Part of the secretariat >> booking hotels is to avoid nonsense like this. Why are they not >> kicking out other guests instead of us? > > Actually, I'm interested in a more

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

On Nov 27, 2007, at 2:06 PM, Pete Resnick wrote: Ray, I think you need to comment on this. Part of the secretariat booking hotels is to avoid nonsense like this. Why are they not kicking out other guests instead of us? Actually, I'm interested in a more basic thing. We usually put a larg

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

At Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:47:13 +0200, Yaakov Stein wrote: > The Westin Bayshore just called me to tell me that they are > undergoing renovations, and so unfortunately they are kicking me out > of the room that I had reserved in early September. That's uh, not good. This actually raises another issu

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

As someone else who made reservations in early September and was told today that they are canceling my reservation, I would be very interested to know how many people have been affected by this last minute change. Although I am perhaps more comfortable than Yaakov with walking outdoors in sub-

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

++; On Nov 27, 2007, at 11:47 AM, Yaakov Stein wrote: The Westin Bayshore just called me to tell me that they are undergoing renovations, and so unfortunately they are kicking me out of the room that I had reserved in early September. They offered to put me up in the Renaissance 5 blocks

Re: Westin Bayshore throwing us out

On 11/27/07 at 9:47 PM +0200, Yaakov Stein wrote: The Westin Bayshore just called me to tell me that they are undergoing renovations, and so unfortunately they are kicking me out of the room that I had reserved in early September. They offered to put me up in the Renaissance 5 blocks away...

Westin Bayshore throwing us out

The Westin Bayshore just called me to tell me that they are undergoing renovations, and so unfortunately they are kicking me out of the room that I had reserved in early September. They offered to put me up in the Renaissance 5 blocks away, but, when asked, told me that the night time temperatu

Re: Lets be careful with those XML submissions to the RFC Editor

Marshall, > ok, so the current process is adequate, we just need to be a little > more careful in following it, right? Mainly yes, but I'm sure processes could be improved, too. The reason why I sent my initial e-mail was to warn authors. And to ask them to check to make sure they're sending the

Re: Lets be careful with those XML submissions to the RFC Editor

On 27-Nov-2007, at 12:16, Marshall Rose wrote: agreed. at the risk of stating the obvious: the problem is identical to the one where the authors submit nroff source to the rfc-editor. it's always a good idea to run the toolchain, and then diff the text against the I-D approved by the IESG. if

Re: Lets be careful with those XML submissions to the RFC Editor

Derek Atkins wrote: The problem is that it's the TXT that's approved, not the XML.. This whole thread is about making sure that the XML received by the RFC Editor matches the Text that was approved by the IESG. Starting with what was approved necessarily means ignoring the XML and starting with

Re: Lets be careful with those XML submissions to the RFC Editor

Marshall, >> Another option is that the RFC Editor should be more careful. It >> really isn't that hard for the RFC Editor to run xml2rfc on the XML >> file and wdiff it against the draft that is approved by the IESG, and >> bring noticeable differences to the two parties. > > agreed. at the risk

Re: Lets be careful with those XML submissions to the RFC Editor

Another option is that the RFC Editor should be more careful. It really isn't that hard for the RFC Editor to run xml2rfc on the XML file and wdiff it against the draft that is approved by the IESG, and bring noticeable differences to the two parties. agreed. at the risk of stating the obvi

Re: Lets be careful with those XML submissions to the RFC Editor

Paul Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > At 11:58 PM +0200 11/25/07, Jari Arkko wrote: >>Paul, >> >>> >>> They still should (strongly) consider checking the validity of the XML >>> by comparing it to what the IESG approved. >> >>Yes, and they do compare to what IESG approved. Substantial chang

Re: Lets be careful with those XML submissions to the RFC Editor

Greetings All, The RFC Editor does retrieve ALL approved IDs and compare our edited text with the originally approved ID, as posted in the internet- drafts repository. Often times, authors send us the XML file, and let us know that they have updated the file to reflect the requested RFC Ed

Re: Lets be careful with those XML submissions to the RFC Editor

At 9:46 AM -0500 11/27/07, Derek Atkins wrote: The problem is that it's the TXT that's approved, not the XML.. This whole thread is about making sure that the XML received by the RFC Editor matches the Text that was approved by the IESG. Starting with what was approved necessarily means ignoring

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-mip4-vpn-problem-solution-03.txt

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-mip4-vpn-problem-solution-03.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draf

Re: Our deadlines are dizzyingly complex and confusing

Noel, > > From: Lakshminath Dondeti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Just in case you are not familiar with AOE, it stands for Anywhere on > > Earth (See http://www.ieee802.org/16/aoe.html) > > Cool concept: "the deadline [time] has not passed if, anywhere on earth, the > deadline date has no

Re: Our deadlines are dizzyingly complex and confusing

Phillip, > Looks to me as if the cut off is start of business for the RFC Editor. > That makes sense to me, no matter how much you try to change the cut > off you can't make it any later than the point where the editor needs > to start work. No, the RFC Editor does not edit drafts after the cutof

RE: Lets be careful with those XML submissions to the RFC Editor

W.r.t. > >Ensuring that the resulting text of the submitted XML source match > >identically the approved ID does not seem correct. > > It does to many people who responded on this thread. > Let me inform you all, then when we did the experiment a few years back, I was monitoring/steering that e

Re: Lets be careful with those XML submissions to the RFC Editor

On 2007-11-25, at 23:51, ext Paul Hoffman wrote: They still should (strongly) consider checking the validity of the XML by comparing it to what the IESG approved. I agree with Paul. The IESG approves the text version of a draft, so the text version is definitive. Making the XML available t