>> for normative terms, but I guess I am dreaming decades ahead...
>
>Although I too dream the impossible dream, I would prefer not to trust
>in formatting to enforce the semantic distinction in this instance.
>
>Peter
/d
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
via mobile
these differences as meaningless saved
some work. Many have stopped treating case as meaningful.
ahh. it's computerization THAT HAS COMPLETELY CHANged MeaNing.
gOOd to NO.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
age
readers, it relieves us from responsibilities for misunderstandings due
to our choosing not to conform to normal language usage.
Making an artificial, formal distinction is far more productive than
worrying about characteristics of typical readers.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
On 5/16/2012 7:34 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 16, 2012 07:31:53 AM Dave Crocker wrote:
On 5/16/2012 7:28 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
can != may
one is ability, the other permission
When we were first taught English grammar, yes. Today, not so much.
Actually pretty much never
On 5/16/2012 7:28 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
can != may
one is ability, the other permission
When we were first taught English grammar, yes. Today, not so much.
Actually pretty much never. In modern usage, the distinction has been lost.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
scerning normativity is placed on the small
range of authors of a specification or on the variable ocean of
potential readers?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
d the responsible handling of patent-related
information are social issues. we cannot solve or mitigate social
issues with technical mechanisms. let's not try.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
it doesn't. The
signal-to-noise ratio is horrible. (That's a first-hand opinion, not an
abstraction.)
On the other hand, if you are volunteering to moderate mis-posted
messages for the IETF list, perhaps the list administrator will let you...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
I took Fred's response as answering it.
Spam efforts exploit return address vectors. This can make it
problematic to send back failure notices.
It has become common for automated response mechanisms NOT to send a
response, such as for a failed posting.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
nd
active mailing lists.
It saves traffic and it saves administrative effort.
Talking about it in an extended thread defeats both of these benefits...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
Howevermuch the answer to the Subject question was not true when the
thread started, it's true now...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
alues.
Original core values of IETF technical work were relative simplicity of
design and immediacy of utility. We pressed to get something useful
working as quickly as we could and then to evolve it.
That still happens. Sometimes.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
hange people's expectations...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
The issue isn't slow lines but occasional connections that the 'other'
side can't predict. That is, it is for those situations in which only
one side can initiate link-level connections.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
administrative tracking overhead.
On the other hand, objective performance/achievement criteria --
statements that describe what experiential information is being sought
-- would be useful to encourage.
d/
--
--
Dave Crocker
bbiw.net
+1
/d
--
Dave Crocker
bbiw.net
via mobile
-Original Message-
From: Scott O Bradner
To: adr...@olddog.co.uk
Cc: wgcha...@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 1:48 PM
Subject: Re: Proposed IESG Statement on the Conclusion of Experiments
encouraging a report is fine
mmon across all uses of Repute.
Did I miss what is actually in -model? If not, shouldn't there be a base
response set (and maybe assertions)?
d/
ps. i hope it's obvious i'm not wearing a hat, but i'm also just asking
questions...
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
On 3/16/2012 11:10 PM, Joel jaeggli wrote:
PMO or whatever it's called in given organzation is a different pool of
money.
+1
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
On 3/16/2012 8:04 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
Suppose we offer them a
show floor or equivalent and they decide they need to send five
market or sales folk to staff it.
wow. that's very creative thinking John.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
we proceed to do the research and planning?"
query.
Part of "exploring" is to develop a sense of the marketing issues, exactly as
you and others have raised.
But these are worth pursuing only if the community is comfortable with the basic
idea of doing this kind of event.
On 3/15/2012 8:49 AM, Pete Resnick wrote:
There has been a discussion under way for some time to get that to happen. I
believe RFP's are being thought about (or written).
we have just entered the RFI stage. I see that as progress.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWo
significant number of serious problems that do need solving but are
difficult. That's frustrating.
So it's a lot more comforting to debate problems we /don't/ have.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
is now possible.
Ultimately, as at least Ned noted, the major problem with the suggestion is that
is seeks to solve a problem that we don't have.
So concerning the proposal: -1
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
On 3/6/2012 6:12 AM, Russ Housley wrote:
I would be much happier with a link to the datatracker HTML version:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-name/
+1
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
On 3/1/2012 6:22 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
I don't think it's efficient at all to put this draft on hold and revive it
later for non-technical reasons.
+1
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing
IETF, exactly what do you mean by "long-time IETF participants".
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
cisions to distinguish between substantive vs. political
input, rather than on trying to prevent the political input.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Steve's phrasing points to the latter and that winds up as a fantasy exercise
which adds complexity and delay. It also tends to add the wrong things in the
wrong way.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ie
more heat than light?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
er_architecture%29#Variable_word_architectures
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
theoretical terms.
> The result, therefore, is that you don't
have variable-length addresses at all but rather fixed-length addresses
with a shorthand encoding for unused bits.
For most variable-length schemes, yes, but not all.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
and Scott have exactly opposite memories of
which constituencies ere lobbying for and against variable-length addressing.
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
On 2/13/2012 7:09 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 2012-02-14 13:42, Dave CROCKER wrote:
On 2/13/2012 4:38 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
There were very specific reasons why this was not done.
Is there a useful citation that covers this strategic decision?
You may recall that at the time
t I'm describing would have been a trivial
re-formatter.
The development, deployment and interoperability differences between these is
massive.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://ww
e IP level to permit early IPv6 adoption to
require a minimal gateway for interworking with the IPv4 world.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
on the Claims for the patent, but not
good enough, I think.
If there is anyone out there with the skills and motivation, an unofficial
translation of the claims could be helpful.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf
e is in making rules that
are superficial, overly detailed, misdirected, excessively rigid, or the like.
In other words, yes, we need to make changes carefully. We need to formulate
clear principles, proper procedures, adequate mechanisms for exceptions, etc., etc.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenb
that presumably would be useful.
Somehow, an apology does not seem sufficient. Something more substantial is
warranted.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/lis
n. Since this failure is quite prevalent, I suggest we
not encourage it.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
ivity. And taken on its
own, in the host or on the wire, it's actually static.
It isn't the activity. A process is an activity. The challenge is a term for
the /flow/ of messages.
It would be nice if it were a single word.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenb
ribing a protocol in operation
between two (or more?) hosts/endsystems/endpoints/...
Does this resonate with others?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
On 1/5/2012 7:01 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
On Thu Jan 5 14:48:54 2012, Dave CROCKER wrote:
If protocol corresponds with program or algorithm, then what is the
communications term that corresponds to process?
It's tempting to say "port number", but that doesn't seem very sa
ementation correctness, except to
the extent that a pattern of implementation problems might affect architectural
choices to improve simplicity.
I've assumed that this thread on the IETF list ought to focus on uses of the
terms that aid IETF work...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg
comprise
multiple protocols.)
My question is:
If protocol corresponds with program or algorithm, then what is the
communications term that corresponds to process?
It's tempting to say "port number", but that doesn't seem very satisfying.
d/
--
Dave C
atekeeper who slows things down.
The reactive model distributes work among those motivated to perform it, rather
than concentrating everything onto the one or few people in charge.
If the reactive model fails, it is usually due to a dysfunctional group, in
which case the model isn't th
are typically about IPR, such as for copies of blue sheets to
provide information about participation.
My own expectation is that something as broad as anti-trust would be likely to
get much wider involvement among the IETF community...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Br
whoever has knowledge for that meeting can populate the database.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
ovided for a meeting constitutes
an interesting database for later reference.
if storage were expensive, perhaps not, but it ain't.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.i
On 12/7/2011 9:48 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 09:36:01AM -0800, Dave CROCKER wrote:
But note that there needs to be a different wiki for each IETF
meeting. That includes a different URL. We should preserve each
meeting's wiki as part of the meeting archive, r
includes a different URL. We should preserve each meeting's wiki as part of the
meeting archive, rather than replacing one meeting's content with the next.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Iet
re, as important for IAOC/Trust work as all other IETF work.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
nal mailing list...
On 12/7/2011 7:11 AM, Margaret Wasserman wrote:
What is the value in publishing a living document as an RFC (which
inherently a static, archival document)?
Certainly a fair question.
It's probably not essential, but it seems to me like a good idea to get a basic
co
t mailing list for each meeting.
(ietf-meeting?)
The current contents -- a template of information to be developed -- looks quite
good. But it can't be "complete", and the definition of "complete" is likely to
change frequently. That's a perfect candidate for
it's no part of the core.
However, if one chooses to use the enhancement, then yes the enhancements
"updates" some aspect of the core.
I believe that ATPS is the latter form of update to DKIM and ADSP.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
to ADSP. It doesn't change anything that DKIM reports, only the rule
for deciding whether ADSP finds an Author Domain Signature.
While yes it has text pertaining to ADSP, I will claim that with ADSP, too, the
modification is in name extraction rather than validation or assessment.
d/
that
this merely wasn't considered very much...
With respect to the earlier discussion, I think the current draft also needs to
explain that the DKIM wg decided that sub-domain delegation was sufficient.
My above text asserts the existence of an alternative. I think it needs to be
explain
pretty solid to me. Seems simple, clear, on point and
reasonable.
(I intend that as a hint to whoever winds up formulating IETF text on the topic,
should that happen...)
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing
re not needed. I suggest updating the "DKIM-Signature
Tag Specification Registry" for the tags as they will appear on the Internet.
+1
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
or an overly broad scope for the effort is another matter. Maintaining
narrow focus is good for any effort...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
te whether we should have done something differently will be at the
court's discretion, not the discretion of an IETF appeals group like the IAB or
ISOC.
However, the concern for excessive policy details to cover hypotheticals, does
quite reasonably argue for simple, basic rules, as indeed others
the criteria for the registry.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Summers are best if selected.
except for the flies.
(or have they disappeared in the last 25 years?)
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo
st to drink only one, if flying home at 30,000 feet
the next day.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
he precise problem space an
effort is working within.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
st in IETF cultural terms and delivered in an IETF
style. So, for example, having every participant sign a statement of awareness
of the policy or having a multi-page policy would not make sense for the IETF.
But something probably would.
d/
--
Dave Cro
that it is well aligned with the detailed document.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
h use of
such old software to be a real concern? "Enough" is, of course, the critical word.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
seen references to /continuing/ interoperability problems
when trying to use docx.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
On 11/26/2011 10:50 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
That leaves ASCII, a few forms of PDF, and RFC 5198-conforming
UTF-8. That wouldn't bother me much, but be careful what you
wish form.
HTML is not on that list?
No doubt it should be, but which version, exactly?
d/
--
Dave Cr
and testing of the
avian carrier IP link did note that this mechanism was extremely good at testing
the quality of and implementations TCP retransmission code.
So this example of packet loss well might apply.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
to NASA mission control announcements during
launch broadcasts, didn't you?
That's certainly where I constantly heard the term used with exactly this
meaning.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing
On 11/9/2011 10:47 PM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Why not keep this as "supplemental materials" even once the official
minutes are posted ?
Why not include the jabber logs the same way ?
+1
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
On 11/2/2011 10:41 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
On Wed Nov 2 17:06:44 2011, Dave CROCKER wrote:
trillian is a multi-protocol client.
I'm hesitent to recommend Trillian, because I understood it used a proxy server
- ie, it involved my giving my credientials to a third party.
It'
t not PSI, I have that on a W2K box.
Swift, Pandion, and Psi are all solid as far as I've experienced, on Windows 7.
The XSF maintains a list at http://xmpp.org/xmpp-software/clients/ that people
may find useful.
Dave.
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
ities like this are not
nuanced and do not ask questions.
Last year, it didn't matter. Five years from now it won't matter. Today it
does and possibly should.
Today, the homage is to take a small action, to avoid possible sensitivities.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg
formal rules require.
My impression is that it /is/ sometimes possible to form a wg without having a
BOF but that the IESG treats the case with skepticism and hence it is strongly
discouraged by the cognizant AD who is shepherding the nascent working group
leaders.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg I
he current Nomcom process. It would be a simpler, less stressful
process, but it would also be less informed.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
going
attention to the inclusion of remote folk, then the remote folk lose.
Tools might help this, but it won't fix it.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailma
n sounds
dandy. If either is sufficiently valuable, then my question is why your groups
haven't needed them. (I'm expecting the answer to be that your groups didn't
feel the need; so my real question is why not?)
d/
--
Dave Cro
lways been a tension about the proper balance between list-based
and f2f-based work. In recent years -- especially as we've had a greater
proportion of people used to doing work /only/ in f2f -- we seem to rely on f2f
more.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWor
work or the online tools.
So the question is how to move the center of gravity back to mailing lists?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
point, possibly the same
language as you just used to explain it.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
IETF consensus for them.
Perhaps that could even result in your no longer having to post criticisms that
are so painful for you.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/ma
ts
review beyond the chairs.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
slots seems an easy and scalable task.
Since requests are usually satisfied -- that is, those asking for a meeting
slot usually get them -- it helps attendee "macro" planning, without getting
into the finer-grained day-of-week and time-of-day debates.
d/
--
Dave Crocke
x27;s interest in an online home for such an historical record,
one is available:
<http://graybeards.net/>
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
the jobs...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
e and offer comments on on IETF and non-IETF /community/
issues that a random member of their body is not likely to have.
So Marshall's point has some validity, but the loss is likely to be much more
significant than that. This is why keeping I* "involvement" is essential, IMO.
d
s put forward is one attempt, by way of keeping I*
Chairs involved, but relying on them less to attend every discussion and carry
all the detail.
Whether that's produces a sufficient balance is an open question.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg I
Proposed and for the
criteria to reach Full. I view both of these as significant.
The most important requirement in making systemic change is creating momentum
for being productive. For "interesting" systems needing significant change,
this is best done by starting with a baby step. Inst
policy when seeking to change an established, essential, well-running
systems is to make as /few/ changes as possible, not as /many/...
Ideally, this means making no changes at all, of course. That is, any proposal
for a change MUST explain why the change is /essential/.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
to target having a contract 3
years ahead of time. However this year is transitional, so we are still
suffering from having contract negotiations too close to the event.
As I understand it, the class list also is very much a factor in planning far
ahead.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg
n relative terms, even Minneapolis is second-tier.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
DI...
d/
(*) A fundamental issue that arises especially for object-based signing is which
identifier to use. There is a very large difference between having it signed by
the author's organization, versus by the web server operator, for example.
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWo
aid in
finding new sponsors.
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
c and many, many comments about venue choice over the years.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
tively large percent". There's absolutely no minority
constituency that is vocal about wanting this to change. That's why I declared
myself giving up on this topic.
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ie
On 8/24/2011 1:01 PM, Steve Crocker wrote:
2. I did not discuss this with him. In general, we have different value sets
with respect to meetings (and many other things).
oh?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
interesting" venues rather than ones that are chosen solely for logistics
convenience.
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Clarification:
The special rate is listed as the Early Bird Package on the website. That part
/is/ available. It's the actual booking that doesn't seem to handle it.
d/
On 8/22/2011 5:29 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
For reference, I found the AT Boutique Hotel, near the Convent
301 - 400 of 1810 matches
Mail list logo
