Total of 151 messages in the last 7 days.
script run at: Fri Jul 10 00:53:01 EDT 2009
Messages | Bytes| Who
+--++--+
11.92% | 18 | 9.85% |86404 | julian.resc...@gmx.de
7.95% | 12 | 7.89% |69269 | iljit...@mu
All -
Testing of the datatracker has been completed. Normal operations will now
be resuming.
Message corruption was occurring because of the way the IESG Datatracker was
formatting messages. The bugs existed at 9 different locations in the code,
which code was of course very old code written ye
All -
There is an ongoing but intermittant problem with the IESG Datatracker
corrupting outgoing announcements. My initial attempts to apply patches
and wait for the next last calls to go out to see if it worked have failed;
I therefore have no choice now but to go to the brute-force method.
As
The IESG conducted an experiment during IETF 73 in Minneapolis and
IETF 74 in San Francisco to increase face-to-face meeting time by
adding two one hour meeting slots on Friday afternoon. While it is
recognized that these meeting slots are not preferred by anyone, these
meeting slots have been ve
On Jul 9, 2009, at 10:01, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
There are two things that together make it completely impossible to
adopt more working languages [...]
My point wasn't to argue that we should consider working in non-
English languages, but simply to explain why it's reasonable to rule
On 9 jul 2009, at 18:15, james woodyatt wrote:
B) is open for debate: what precisely should be the set of primary
natural languages used in IETF documents? Should it continue to be
English only? I'd very much prefer to see *that* discussion
vigorously deferred while our archival format co
On Jul 3, 2009, at 08:07, Doug Ewell wrote:
As always when this discussion occurs, there are at least three
different issues swirling around:
1. ASCII-only vs. UTF-8
2. Plain text vs. higher-level formatting, for text flow and
readability
3. Whether it is a good idea to include high-qua
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
>> If
>> we had a DTD that worked in other pieces of software, it could be
>> converted using commonly available software into text formats.
>
> What is supplied with xml2rfc works fine with other pieces of software,
> per Ned's response.
Perhap
Dear colleagues:
Following the success of the Internet Society's IPv6 panel held at
the IETF 74 venue, I want to make you aware of panel event to be held
during the IETF 75 week in Stockholm, Sweden:
Securing the DNS: Towards a more secure Internet
11:45am - 12:45pm (UTC+2), Tuesday 28 July
Patrik,
> Problem with LaTeX and TeX is the need for class libraries,
How is that different from needing the latest tcl code for xml2rfc ?
> and the lack of agreed upon way of distributing a
> LaTeX/TeX file with the class files needed (part from what is "standard"),
> or lack of automatic to
On 9 jul 2009, at 1:56, Douglas Otis wrote:
The concern was voiced in opposition to suggestions for using Word
input files as a means to generate inputs for I-D or RFC generation
utilities.
Nobody suggested that.
I said that it would be useful to be able to use a "standard issue"
word pr
11 matches
Mail list logo
