On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Joe Abley wrote:
> What useful history can you possibly get when each file is only ever
> substantively changed by publishing another file?
>
> Aue Te Ariki! He toki ki roto taku mahuna!
>
> On 2013-03-16, at 14:21, James Cloos wrote:
>
>>> "JL" == John Levine
A new, I-D, draft-housley-rfc2050bis-00.txt, has been posted. I am writing to
ask for your review.
Russ
= = = = = = = = = =
Filename:draft-housley-rfc2050bis-00.txt
Title: The Internet Numbers Registry System
Creation date: 2013-03-14
Group: Individual Submission
On 3/16/13 4:54 PM, James Galvin wrote:
>
>
>
> It seems to me that the real question here is what is the role of the
> confirming body? Should its role be biased towards a review (however
> deep) of the work of the NOMCOM or should its role be biased towards
> ensuring the NOMCOM has follow
On 3/16/2013 3:05 PM, Fred Baker (fred) wrote:
My understanding, at least in the case of the TSV AD in this event, is that
Fred,
I think we've all done a pretty good job of separating discussion of the
immediate crisis from discussing the broader question of Nomcom and job
criteria. I do
On 3/16/2013 3:54 PM, James Galvin wrote:
-- On March 13, 2013 10:45:11 AM -0800 Melinda Shore
I think we need to acknowledge that the confirming body (IAB)
effectively has veto power over those criteria/requirements,
since it can reject candidates who were selected by evaluation
against those
-- On March 13, 2013 10:45:11 AM -0800 Melinda Shore
wrote regarding Re: Consensus on the
responsibility for qualifications? (Was: Re: Nomcom is responsible for
IESG qualifications) --
On 3/13/2013 10:27 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>4. Nomcom makes its own decision about the criteria it w
On Mar 13, 2013, at 11:49 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:
> Dave, all,
>
> We talked about this in the Monday plenary. Obviously people have read or
> understood the situation in different ways. But that should not stop us from
> reaching a common understanding of the situation now that we realised we
What useful history can you possibly get when each file is only ever
substantively changed by publishing another file?
Aue Te Ariki! He toki ki roto taku mahuna!
On 2013-03-16, at 14:21, James Cloos wrote:
>> "JL" == John Levine writes:
>
> JL> In practice, rsync works great. I pull the R
Hi Jim,
At 09:24 AM 3/16/2013, James Galvin wrote:
An important principle in 3777 is to give the NOMCOM the flexibility
it needs to do what it needs to do when it needs to be done, but no
less flexibility than it needs. I see your text as reducing that
flexibility by stating how the NOMCOM "un
> "JL" == John Levine writes:
JL> In practice, rsync works great. I pull the RFCs and I-Ds every night.
The benefits git would bring are history and reduced badwidth per pull
when updating.
The latter, of course, is only really relevant when the daily pull is
done over a low-bandwidth link
-- On March 15, 2013 1:23:42 PM -0400 Dave Crocker
wrote regarding Re: Consensus on the responsibility for qualifications?
(Was: Re: Nomcom is responsible for IESG qualifications) --
On 3/15/2013 12:47 PM, James Galvin wrote:
> The choice of the phrase "understanding of the IETF community'
On Mar 15, 2013, at 8:01 AM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> Is there a publicly-available Git repository of RFCs or of
> Internet-Drafts?
>
> The reason I ask about a Git repository is that regular Git "pulls"
> from such a repository seems like a straightforward and well-supported
> way to maintain a
> "Andrew" == Andrew Chi writes:
Andrew> On 3/15/13 12:45 PM, Francis Galiegue wrote:
>> * rsync doesn't prevent corruption of data, git does; * git show,
>> git log, git bisect; * git format-patch, git send-email etc.
Andrew> I like the proposal, though in my experience it's
13 matches
Mail list logo
