Re: subject_prefix on IETF Discuss?

2011-08-05 Thread Dave CROCKER
On 8/5/2011 2:56 PM, Doug Barton wrote: To me it boils down to you saying in effect, "Here is my way of working with e-mail, and I'd like the IETF to support it." If there was a way that we could do that which had no impact on people who don't work that way (such as the List-Id header) then I'd

Re: Last Call: (Reducing the Standards Track to Two Maturity Levels) to BCP

2011-08-05 Thread Hector Santos
Brian E Carpenter wrote: Are you saying that the existing review process for direct submission or Independent Submission RFCs fails to detect work that overlaps with WGs? At least in one experience, I would not say it was a failure per se but more realistically, for many possible reasons, it s

Re: subject_prefix on IETF Discuss?

2011-08-05 Thread Doug Barton
On 08/05/2011 09:45, Warren Kumari wrote: > Subject-line tags allow me to just drop everything in the inbox and then, at > a glance figure out what to read, and in what order. I then move the read > stuff (and that that I don't care about) into separate mailboxes. To me it boils down to you sayi

Re: subject_prefix on IETF Discuss?

2011-08-05 Thread John C Klensin
--On Friday, August 05, 2011 12:45 -0400 Warren Kumari wrote: > > On Aug 3, 2011, at 7:21 PM, Richard Kulawiec wrote: > >> >> -1. >> >> This list complies with RFC 2919, which alleviates the need >> for the horrible, unscalable, obsolete, ugly kludge of >> Subject-line tags. I suggest that

Re: Last Call: (Reducing the Standards Track to Two Maturity Levels) to BCP

2011-08-05 Thread Brian E Carpenter
Hector, On 2011-08-04 14:35, Hector Santos wrote: > Brian E Carpenter asked: > >> Can you be more specific? Are you talking about >> >> a) drafts that appear in the WG with very mature text, so complete >> the WG progress very quickly? >> >> b) drafts that are direct submissions to the IESG, and

Re: [v6ops] Last Call: (IPv6 in 3GPP Evolved Packet System) to Informational RFC

2011-08-05 Thread Jouni
I got one comment to our draft. Section 5.4 discusses some known neighbor discovery issues out there. I forgot to add one that I believe belongs here or then in Section 5.2; which one I am not sure yet. In Section 5.2 it is said that the GGSN/PGW provides an unique IID to the UE (i.e. guarantee

Re: [v6ops] Last Call: (IPv6 in 3GPP Evolved Packet System) to Informational RFC

2011-08-05 Thread Jouni
Dear Gang, I would be inclined to say that within the 3GPP scope the client is always the "UE" and its form factor or the end usage scenario does not really matter. It does not change the way the UE is expected to behave from the 3GPP system point of view, unless there is a new functional requi

Queen Sirikit National Convention Center

2011-08-05 Thread Glen Zorn
I note that there is an opening on the IETF meeting calendar for an Asian meeting in 2013. Here is a suggestion: Meeting Facilities: http://www.qsncc.com/venue-information/our-facilities.html There are 7 pages of "Official Hotels", starting at about $60/night. Official Hotels: http://www.qsncc.

Re: subject_prefix on IETF Discuss?

2011-08-05 Thread Warren Kumari
On Aug 3, 2011, at 7:21 PM, Richard Kulawiec wrote: > > -1. > > This list complies with RFC 2919, which alleviates the need for the > horrible, unscalable, obsolete, ugly kludge of Subject-line tags. > I suggest that anyone who really, *really* wants them on their copies > of messages arrange t

Re: I-D Working groups and mailing list

2011-08-05 Thread Dave CROCKER
On 8/5/2011 1:45 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: In my experience, many ID authors actually forget to consider where to send feedback. Thus making this something to be checked upon ID submission (maybe with a way to opt-out) might be helpful. +1 When something is a routine expectation it is reason

Re: Last Call: (Reducing the Standards Track to Two Maturity Levels) to BCP

2011-08-05 Thread SM
Hi Russ, At 12:28 PM 8/3/2011, Russ Housley wrote: I am well aware of the implementation reports. The premise here is that the protocol specification is "good enough" there are at least two interoperable implementations and the protocol is deployed widely. The implementation report would beco

Re: I-D Working groups and mailing list

2011-08-05 Thread Julian Reschke
On 2011-08-04 16:12, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote: From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bill McQuillan [mcqui...@pobox.com] Perhaps it could be included in the ID-Announce message. In a lot of situations, the I-D submission tool knows the name of the relevant worki