On 7/29/13 7:25 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>
> My suggestion is for a 'status' page that gives a brief summary
> about the current state of the working group, ideally listing the
> current, near-term vector of the work -- what's the current focus of
> effort -- and major open issues.
>
> I'l
Hi Dave,
I am not Jari, but I do have an opinion on your thoughts below...
On 7/29/13 1:25 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
I've been finding discussion and actions about newcomers far more
interesting this year, than most previous ones. So I think it's worth
pressing on several fronts, to see how
On 7/27/2013 11:01 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:
It reads rudely when taken out of context. But try reading the whole
paragraph in RFC 3184:
...
Exactly. My experience back when I was a newcomer was that it was
easy enough to ask beginner's questions after the meeting, and obviously
wrong to do so duri
On Jul 28, 2013, at 9:10 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
>>>
yup. i guess it is time for my quarterly suggestion to remove the
projectors and screens.
>>>
>>> Then I guess it's time for my quarterly "I'd be good with that."
>>
>> As would I.
>
> Me too, as long as we get whiteboards or flip-ch
The question I want an answer to is whether this is going to be the only
standard for a binary version of JSON allowed.
I have an alternative proposal which is designed to be compatible with JSON
so that existing encoder and decoder implementations can be used and so
that a single decoder can hand
I have reviewed the -03 version of this draft, and I support this as a
proposed standard.
As an exercise for review, I implemented a large part of the draft (in
plain Python) and found the description completely adequate to produce
working code that parsed the examples in the draft correctly, and
I have reviewed this version of the CBOR draft, and am fully supportive of this
as a proposed standard.
For IoT applications over CoAP and other protocols, there is a clear need for a
standard binary object representation with a straightforward mapping to JSON
that is suitable for constrained
Hi Kathleen,
The Edu Team tried to achieve this by providing a high-level overview of
all the IETF areas (including a short description of the various WGs,
current discussions and hot topics etc.). The RAI people offered to do
that for the first time in Orlando:
https://www.ietf.org/edu/proc
On Jul 28, 2013, at 2:47 PM, Arturo Servin wrote:
> Even in context is rude. Even when doing it is because of practical
> reasons and for the good use of the scarce meeting time, I think that is
> one of the reasons why the IETF is so intimidating for newcomers.
There's a careful line that
Douglas,
Totally agree that a requirement is that F2F and remote are equals.
I even believe that a presentation-less format (as the described) is
better for remote participants.
About the minor changes, perhaps. Not very convinced but it could be.
In the same line, what about to have
On Jul 28, 2013, at 3:05 PM, Arturo Servin wrote:
>
> That may work as well.
>
> It depends on the time that the presenters have to make the material
> available.
>
> The important is to have discussion-material available in advance. It
> could be a presentation or a video (
That may work as well.
It depends on the time that the presenters have to make the material
available.
The important is to have discussion-material available in advance. It
could be a presentation or a video (I would personally prefer a
presentation because I can quickly
Why during the F2F IETF meeting?
It seems that is not a good way to use the time of an AD during the F2F
IETF meeting. I think is a good idea to provide people remote-access to
ADs, but doing it during the F2F IETF meeting does not look like a good
use of resources.
/as
On 7/27
Why not put the presentations up on YouTube as podcasts. That way people
can watch them before starting off for the meeting.
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Arturo Servin wrote:
>
> I agree with Randy.
>
> Presentation material, documents, etc. should be available in
> advance
>
I agree with Randy.
Presentation material, documents, etc. should be available in advance
at least 1 or 2 weeks before the IETF (not 2 hours, not 2 days) and to
support the discussion (not to be presented). People in the meeting
should have read it (draft and slides) and be prepar
Even in context is rude. Even when doing it is because of practical
reasons and for the good use of the scarce meeting time, I think that is
one of the reasons why the IETF is so intimidating for newcomers.
Regards,
as
On 7/27/13 10:37 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> > It's not wrong.
>>
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 4:38 AM, Donald Eastlake wrote:
> nroff still works fine for me. It's already there in Mac OS X.
>
>
Only the topic of the conversation is how to get more people involved in
IETF, not how to make them run away screaming and crying.
--
Website: http://hallambaker.com/
On 28/07/13 01:27, Melinda Shore wrote:
On 7/27/13 3:52 PM, Aaron Yi DING wrote:
What do you mean by conference? too much information inferred in your
term that may confuse others on the list. Will appreciate, if you can
share bit more on it, behind the single term "conference" that you
particu
So do you expect your implementations on devices with hardware acceleration to
have any limits on resolution of images they can decode? I can't imagine how I
could implement the frame buffers in VP8 in VLSI without having an upper limit
on both the width and height of the image. How do you dea
nroff still works fine for me. It's already there in Mac OS X.
Thanks,
Donald
=
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
d3e...@gmail.com
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, J
As an off-topic note, thanks to Alexa, Alexey, Jari, Lorenzo and the
Meetecho team.
At 16:52 27-07-2013, Aaron Yi DING wrote:
What do you mean by conference? too much information inferred in
your term that may confuse others on the list. Will appreciate, if
you can share bit more on it, behin
On Jul 28, 2013, at 10:14 AM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 07/28/2013 09:47 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 28, 2013, at 9:33 AM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
>>
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256
>>>
>>> On 07/28/2013
On Jul 28, 2013, at 6:10 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
> putting up yuotube/vimeo tutorials on the wg's technical space would be
> a good thing for folk with spare time to do. i am sure we could arrange
> pointer space on the wg's web page.
Effective video presentations are _hard_. Otherwise they're T
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/28/2013 09:47 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
>
> On Jul 28, 2013, at 9:33 AM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256
>>
>> On 07/28/2013 09:10 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
>>>
>>> On Jul 28, 2013, at 7:35 AM, Keith Moo
On Jul 28, 2013, at 9:33 AM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 07/28/2013 09:10 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 28, 2013, at 7:35 AM, Keith Moore
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 28, 2013, at 6:17 AM, Melinda Shore wrote:
>>>
On 7/27/13
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/28/2013 09:10 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
>
> On Jul 28, 2013, at 7:35 AM, Keith Moore
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 28, 2013, at 6:17 AM, Melinda Shore wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/27/13 8:13 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
yup. i guess it is time for my quarterly s
On Jul 28, 2013, at 7:35 AM, Keith Moore wrote:
>
> On Jul 28, 2013, at 6:17 AM, Melinda Shore wrote:
>
>> On 7/27/13 8:13 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>>> yup. i guess it is time for my quarterly suggestion to remove the
>>> projectors and screens.
>>
>> Then I guess it's time for my quarterly "I'
On Jul 28, 2013, at 6:23 AM,
wrote:
>> I would be very sorry to see IETF *working* meetings turned into
>> something closer to conferences,
>
> with poster sessions!
And mandatory suit and tie (or women's equivalent business attire) for
presenters and chairs.
Il giorno Sat, 27 Jul 2013 16:43:40 +0200
Jari Arkko ha scritto:
> Simon,
>
> > for your information, the Meetecho team is going to record five
> > tutorials on Sunday:
> >
> > http://www.ietf.org/meeting/87/remote-participation.html#meetecho
> >
> > We have already provided a URL for those wh
29 matches
Mail list logo
