I like this.
Nit: There's a missing to in the last line.
Joel,
Thanks for writing this. I have some detailed comments, but perhaps I should
first start with my own perception of the meeting.
I traveled to this meeting as a part my trip to attend RIPE a few days, and to
catch a few different people in the hallways on separate topics. One datapoint:
On 10/15/12 2:53 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
ok, i am lost. the draft is only an outline and has zero content? is
it a quiz?
Treat it like that and see if you can give Joel the right answers.
01 is available. I imagine the SIDR experience was a bit different,
having been to another SIDR
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq.
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-softwire-dslite-deployment-06
At 9:12 AM -0400 9/5/12, Michael Richardson {quigon} wrote:
Maybe I'm also concerned because many in the former elite have
moved to Apple Mail, and it seems that it is bug
compatible with Outlook in it's assumption that format=flowed is
the default, an act which destroys email quoting, and
For those interested in what has changed in this draft by comparison
to the specification of iSER in RFC 5046, here's a reasonably readable
diff that shows the text changes:
http://www.stiemerling.org/ietf/storm-review/diff-rfc5046-to-iser.html
and the edited version of RFC 5046 on which this
o Co-location with RIPE appeared useful. I agree with you Joel that
tighter packing would have made a difference. I met some people who
noted they will not attend, but probably would have attended if it
was during the week. Co-locating individual WG interims with RIPEs
and NANOGs
Randy,
ripe/foonog would not appreciate a meeting in schedule conflict. would
ietf appreciate a foonog meeting scheduled in conflict with and at the
same venue as an ietf meeting?
Agreed. But here's at least one idea on how to avoid that. Arrange an interim
on a RIPE Friday afternoon,
On Oct 15, 2012, at 5:53 PM, Adrian Farrel adr...@olddog.co.uk wrote:
ok, i am lost. the draft is only an outline and has zero content? is
it a quiz?
Treat it like that and see if you can give Joel the right answers.
For me: Did it make any difference to you that it was a LIM rather
Hi Olafur,
I posted the following question about the draft about two weeks ago [1]:
On publication of draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2671bis-edns0-09, will it be
part of STD 13?
I did not see any comments from the WG about that. I had an off-list
exchange with the RFC Series Editor about STDs.
On 16/10/2012 17:43, SM wrote:
Hi Olafur,
I posted the following question about the draft about two weeks ago [1]:
On publication of draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2671bis-edns0-09, will it be
part of STD 13?
I did not see any comments from the WG about that. I had an off-list
exchange with the
On Oct 17, 2012, at 4:19 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
o Co-location with RIPE appeared useful. I agree with you Joel that
tighter packing would have made a difference. I met some people who
noted they will not attend, but probably would have attended if it
was during the week. Co-locating
The Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (bfd) working group in the Routing
Area of the IETF is undergoing rechartering. The IESG has not made any
determination yet. The following draft charter was submitted, and is
provided for informational purposes only. Please send your comments to
the IESG
The Operations and Management Area Working Group (opsawg) working group
in the Operations and Management Area of the IETF has been rechartered.
For additional information please contact the Area Directors or the WG
Chairs.
Operations and Management Area Working Group (opsawg)
14 matches
Mail list logo
