The IAOC and IAD will hold Office Hours in Dublin on Wednesday and
Thursday from 1610 - 1700 in the Vanessa suite on floor 2.
This is an opportunity to ask questions about or offer suggestions
regarding the administrative support of the IETF and the Meetings; or
make inquiries about Hosting a
The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Web Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV) SEARCH '
draft-reschke-webdav-search-17.txt as a Proposed Standard
I have reviewed that document and I strongly support
The IESG is considering an experiment for IETF 73 in Minneapolis, and
we would like community comments before we proceed. Face-to-face
meeting time is very precious, especially with about 120 IETF WGs
competing for meeting slots. Several WGs are not able to get as much
meeting time as they need
I support conducting this experiment.
RjS
On Jul 17, 2008, at 4:33 PM, IETF Chair wrote:
The IESG is considering an experiment for IETF 73 in Minneapolis, and
we would like community comments before we proceed. Face-to-face
meeting time is very precious, especially with about 120 IETF WGs
At 2:33 PM -0700 7/17/08, IETF Chair wrote:
The IESG is considering an experiment for IETF 73 in Minneapolis, and
we would like community comments before we proceed.
Maybe this could be delayed until the spring meeting in San
Francisco. Many people who will bring their families to Minneapolis
Dear Russ;
On Jul 17, 2008, at 5:33 PM, IETF Chair wrote:
The IESG is considering an experiment for IETF 73 in Minneapolis, and
we would like community comments before we proceed. Face-to-face
meeting time is very precious, especially with about 120 IETF WGs
competing for meeting slots.
On 2008-07-18 09:33, IETF Chair wrote:
The IESG is considering an experiment for IETF 73 in Minneapolis, and
we would like community comments before we proceed. Face-to-face
meeting time is very precious, especially with about 120 IETF WGs
competing for meeting slots. Several WGs are not
It would be be best if the Fri afternoon slot were filled in early
rather than as the last slots to be filled in. That way people would
have more notice that they're being included in the experiment and
there'd be less of a chance of a rude surprise.
Tony
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On
At 04:33 PM 7/17/2008, IETF Chair wrote:
The IESG is considering an experiment for IETF 73 in Minneapolis,
0900-1130 Morning Session I
1130-1300 Break
1300-1400 Afternoon Session I
1415-1515 Afternoon Session II
I support this schedule
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:15:04AM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
But please do *design* the experiment - what are you going to
measure to find out if it's a success or failure?
I agree strongly with this latter point.
I've been trying to come up with a measure of success. So far, I
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
But please do *design* the experiment - what are you going to
measure to find out if it's a success or failure?
+1
For example, exactly what problems are being targeted?
Have sessions been getting turned down due to a lack of slots? Are they
really sessions
Marshall:
Would there be a refreshment break in the afternoon ?
No. It is just 15 minutes to get between the two one-hour
sessions. The proposed extension to the meeting is 2.25 hours. We
regularly have 2.5 hour sessions with no refreshments, so I do not
see the need for additional food
Is there a cost implication for stripping down the network and other
facilities?
This usually disappears pretty promptly on Friday, presumably allowing it to
be packed up for shipping and the associated staff/volunteers to travel on
the Friday.
If we extend into the mid afternoon, do we
Brian:
The proposed Friday schedule would be:
0900-1130 Morning Session I
1130-1300 Break
1300-1400 Afternoon Session I
1415-1515 Afternoon Session II
Try it. We've been having periodical email arguments about Friday
afternoon for years; an experiment is the best way to
One measurement would be the number of conflicts that cannot be resolved
with and without the extra slots.
Tony Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:15:04AM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
But please do *design* the experiment - what are
At 17:33 17/07/2008, IETF Chair wrote:
The IESG is considering an experiment for IETF 73 in Minneapolis, and
we would like community comments before we proceed. Face-to-face
meeting time is very precious, especially with about 120 IETF WGs
competing for meeting slots. Several WGs are not
Dear Russ;
After our discussions on this in San Jose, I spent a little time
thinking of options for extra meeting time. Here are some more
considered thoughts, focusing mostly on costs and meeting logistics,
and intended to engender further discussion. I will be ruthless in
doing back of
Olafur,
If you recall the Paris meeting, we did try a different mixture
of session lengths, and it caused quite some scheduling problems.
I'd have to dig out some old email for the details, but it
was definitely a problem. So after Paris, we stuck to the late
dinner schedule, but went back to a
--On Thursday, 17 July, 2008 18:19 -0400 Tony Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would be be best if the Fri afternoon slot were filled in
early rather than as the last slots to be filled in. That way
people would have more notice that they're being included in
the experiment and there'd be
an observation:
With today's half day on Friday a good percentage of those people who
chose to stay until noon can still catch a flight home that same day in
most IETF meeting locations (except for people flying across some
ocean).
Moving the end time on Friday until 15:15 would cut that
what is interesting to me is the weekend factor.
for nearly a decade, I've been going to mtgs the
wkend before the start of IETF - workshops, training sessions,
sidebars, RSSAC mtgs, etc.
about five years ago, the -other- suite of interesting/useful
meetings started occuring the weekend -after-
Total of 36 messages in the last 7 days.
script run at: Fri Jul 18 00:53:01 EDT 2008
Messages | Bytes| Who
+--++--+
8.33% |3 | 10.51% |21374 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
8.33% |3 | 6.68% |13575 | [EMAIL
The IESG has received a request from the Path Computation Element WG
(pce) to consider the following document:
- 'Inter-AS Requirements for the Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) '
draft-ietf-pce-interas-pcecp-reqs-06.txt as an Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make
72nd IETF Meeting - Dublin, Ireland
July 27-August 1, 2008
Host: Alcatel-Lucent
Early-Bird registration cutoff is tomorrow Friday, 18 July at 17:00 PDT
(24:00 UTC/GMT). After that time, the registration fee will increase by
$150 USD to $785 USD.
Only 10 days until the Dublin IETF! Online
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'SIV Authenticated Encryption using AES '
draft-dharkins-siv-aes-05.txt as an Informational RFC
This document has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an
IETF Working Group.
The IESG contact person is Tim Polk.
A URL of this
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 5259
Title: Internet Message Access Protocol -
CONVERT Extension
Author: A. Melnikov, Ed.,
P. Coates, Ed.
Status: Standards
26 matches
Mail list logo
