On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 20:11 +, John Levine wrote:
http://www.ietf.org/meeting/hosting-an-ietf.html
Is there a list anywhere of minimum requirements without which it's
not even worth looking at a venue? I'd expect that if a place doesn't
have (as some examples) a meeting room big
We are paid well to design protocols because designing protocols that
work well in practice is a tricky art that is best practiced by experts
in the field.
But negotiating all the arrangements for a complex technical conference
is a straightforward matter of comparing the published room rates of
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker [hal...@gmail.com]
As Tom Knight pointed out when the IPv4 address size was chosen, there
aren't enough for one for each person living on the planet.
Remember that we are trying to build a network that is going to last
for hundreds if not thousands of years.
From: Dave Cridland [d...@cridland.net]
Does anyone other than historians honestly care what the original was?
Does anyone honestly care what last month's version of the source code was?
Dale
From: John Levine [jo...@taugh.com]
It would have cost me more than twice as much as it did to fly to
Beijing, for example, if I had taken a direct flight from DFW
That's very odd. I see lots of fares from DFW to YVR from Saturday to
Saturday via Houston or Denver for in upcoming weeks
From: Martin Rex [m...@sap.com]
IPv6 PA prefixes result in that awkward renumbering. Avoiding the
renumbering implies provider independent network prefix.
With IPv4, you would have typically keept your IPv4 network address
(the old class A, B C from early 199x) even when changing
From: Paul Hoffman [paul.hoff...@vpnc.org]
Instead, I propose that we simply designate the terminal room (which
is already reserved for future meetings) be designated as meeting
areas where talking is allowed / encouraged. Earplugs could be
provided for people who really want a quiet
From: Mark Nottingham [m...@mnot.net]
What surprises me and many others is that people are still using it
and promoting it, when it's well-understood by almost EVERYONE who was
involved in using XML for protocols in the past ten years agrees that
it's a mistake.
It sounds to me like what
From: Murray S. Kucherawy [superu...@gmail.com]
I think it's impossible to determine with certainty whether someone
standing at the mic and asserting a position is doing so based on what
an employer is insisting on doing, or that person's opinion.
But it is possible, over a period of time,
From: Glen Zorn [glenz...@gmail.com]
I suppose that that may be one reason why my experiences with
corporate manipulation (or domination, if you prefer) of the IETF have
been of people with those very reputations blocking good ideas that
threatened the interests of their employer. It's
Watching a play starting with the third act is always interesting but not
informative.
If there's a dispute worthy of attention by the *whole IETF membership*, could
someone please summarize it (in a reasonably unbiased way) to bring the rest of
us up to speed?
Dale
From: Hannes Tschofenig [hannes.tschofe...@gmx.net]
Eran claims that enterprise identity management equipment manufacturer
dominate the discussion.
There's a common problem in the IETF that the development of a standard is
dominated by companies that incorporate the standard into their
From: Yaron Sheffer [yaronf.i...@gmail.com]
[...] but what I'm reading is three concrete statements that IETF
members can respond to, and (if we accept them as true) consider how
to address in the future:
- A Web-focused protocol was forced to adopt enterprise use cases.
[...]
My first
On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 09:16 -0400, Simon Perreault wrote:
Even though I replied to the survey, this also irritated me. And I sense
a trend here. It seems that the number of non-plain-text files coming
from IAB has been increasing.
Suggestion: just put the content right in the body of the
On Fri, 2012-07-20 at 06:07 -0700, IETF Administrative Director wrote:
The draft policy entitled Draft Fee Policy for Legal Requests can be found
at: http://iaoc.ietf.org/policyandprocedures.html
Assuming that the IAOC has set these fees to be close to the actual
costs of servicing legal
On Thu, 2012-06-28 at 20:05 -0500, Alan Johnston wrote:
4.1 - REQ-16:
in this case, seizing the line is the same thing as dialing.
That seems wrong - I would have thought it was a prerequisite as
opposed to the same thing because seizing the line is immediately
followed by a
Having never heard of this proposal before, I found the concept
interesting, but the exposition in the draft was difficult to grasp in
certain places. I believe that it is because the text assumes that
the reader already knows the underlying theory of what the process is
intended to accomplish.
From: Stephen Farrell [stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie]
For example, in section 3, the syntax of the ni URI scheme is
spelled out with admirable clarity and exactness, including:
Digest Value [Required] The digest value MUST be encoded using the
base64url [RFC4648] encoding.
To: IETF
From: Dan Pitt, executive director, ONF
Subject: Liaison between ONF and IETF
[...] Finally, ONF is interested in discussing cross-publishing future
specifications at the IETF, and would welcome a discussion on how best
to accomplish this as well.
Who will ONF be sending to the
From: John C Klensin [john-i...@jck.com]
Remind me:
Is bold must more or less compelling that underlined must. And
where does uppercase MUST fit in?
I fear the slightly richer publication format will give rise
to a slightly more complex revision of RFC 2119.
Let's try to remember
From: Hannes Tschofenig [hannes.tschofe...@nsn.com]
In the telecommunication industry you have also seen a lot of layoffs over
the last 10 years and so there are rarely young people around in these
companies anymore (because they either got fired or left the company
voluntarily).
... or
From: Allison Mankin [allison.man...@gmail.com]
I'd be interested to learn of studies of the CS workforce outside the
US. Are there recruitment and attrition problems everywhere?
I've seen reports in the popular press that the fraction of women
entering software is higher in many Asian
From: Thomas Narten [nar...@us.ibm.com]
If this conversation was about IETF culture, and how it's hard for
non-Americans to participate IETF style, I bet folk would much more
quickly recognize some of the real issues.
Has there been any organized attempt to reduce the difficulty for
Note that I've changed the Subject. I'm hoping that the readers may
have some information on the question I ask below.
From: Fred Baker [f...@cisco.com]
If you want my opinion (nobody asked, but I will presume that someone
is wondering), the corollary is why aren't more students interested
From: Mary Barnes [mary.ietf.bar...@gmail.com]
Personally, I think IETF has far more of an issue when it comes to
cultural and gender diversity than it does with not having enough
younger folks. This is particularly visible in the leadership.
Given that one moves up in the IETF through
From: John C Klensin [john-i...@jck.com]
The harder part
--because it does require community and leadership commitment --
is finding ways to make those mentoring/ advisory roles work.
What would be good patterns
On 4/30/12 2:03 AM, Riccardo Bernardini framefri...@gmail.com wrote:
In this case the best solution (although not easy to implement) would
be to ask directly to young women: Are you interested in an ICT
carrer?, If yes, why? If no, why not?
From: Monique Morrow [mmor...@cisco.com]
Well I do
From: Mary Barnes [mary.ietf.bar...@gmail.com]
Here is an article that does a far better job of explaining the
situation than I did:
http://www.todaysengineer.org/2011/May/women-in-engineering.asp
The largest reason women leave engineering is due to the work
environment and perceived
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker [hal...@gmail.com]
Security could very well be an area that faces rather different
challenges to other areas.
Of course -- In most areas, a creative, low-cost solution that works
90% of the time can be the basis of a new company, if not an entire
industry. In
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker [hal...@gmail.com]
People can argue about process, RFC formats and governance but it
should be beyond argument that any institution that cannot recruit
younger members is going to die.
Well, the Internet as we know it is 30 years old now, and not changing
nearly
From: Randy Bush [ra...@psg.com]
large ipv4 deployments want an
absolutely minimal, compatible, feature-match upgrade to ipv6.
I'm not in the loop, but it seems to me that this is obvious.
What has the IETF done to define a way that IPv4 deployments
can make the transition they want? If
From: Craig Finseth [snar...@gmail.com]
Actually, it's globally *unique*, because it contains the MAC address.
The problem is that it's not *routable*, even within the context of a
single host. And unless you give an application on the host guidance,
it depends on host-context routing
From: Sabahattin Gucukoglu [m...@sabahattin-gucukoglu.com]
[...] when I ping one from the other using link-local-scoped
addresses, I have to put in this zone identifier (%ifname on BSD and
Linux).
[...]
Can't it figure it out itself?
OK, I know nothing about the subject, but when I do
From: Craig Finseth [snar...@gmail.com]
You've just rediscovered what the link local part of the link-local
address means: the address is local to the link! It is not globally
unique or even unique within a host, it is just unique within a link.
Actually, it's globally *unique*, because it
From: SM [s...@resistor.net]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbK-g8tKnoc
When Mussolini was Area Director ...
Dale
How do you find the well-known service portal if DNS isn't working?
Dale
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Todd Glassey
[tglas...@certichron.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 7:30 AM
To: dn...@ietf.org; IETF Discussion
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 14:55, Alan Johnston alan.b.johns...@gmail.com wrote:
The FBI and their would-be tipsters could be flat out trying
investigate everyone who [...]
... including uses a VPN -- which is ubiquitous among business travelers.
Seriously - who writes this stuff?
I'd guess
From: Pete Resnick [presn...@qualcomm.com]
Before posting this Last Call (and the similar one for
draft-ietf-sieve-convert), the documents *were* returned to the SIEVE WG
to review the situation. With minimal complaint from the WG and no
indication that the WG wished to change their
From: Adrian Farrel [adr...@olddog.co.uk]
In my opinion, this second last call should be suspended until this
significant breach of the IETF's IPR policy set out in BCP79 has been
resolved.
[...]
I believe the document should be returned to the working group who are
the main victims of
In a situation where it is not clear if the foot-soldiers care if the work
gets done, I would contact them individually and find out if there
is any real interest in finishing the drafts.
Dale
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
From: Evain, Jean-Pierre [ev...@ebu.ch]
I went to read the IETF rules and procedures at
http://www.ietf.org/about/process-docs.html#RFC4181
I couldn’t find any particular rule for mentioning credits (or not). I
guess this might have had a relation to some rights related issues?
There
On 1 Dec 2011, at 17:09, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote:
Unfortunately, lawyers on the whole tend to
suggest solutions to problems that create additional legal work.
Not that other specialists are free of this problem...
Programmer's Secret Understanding
1 It's more fun
From: IETF Chair [ch...@ietf.org]
The IETF legal counsel and insurance agent suggest that the IETF ought
to have an antitrust policy. To address this need, a lawyer is
needed.
My first observation is that the IETF legal counsel is a lawyer, so we
have that covered. Then I thought about it
From: SM [s...@resistor.net]
Since it is important that working group members have adequate time
to review all documents, it would be good if relevant WG documents
are made available at least two weeks before the start of the WG
session. Could the IESG please do something so that
From: Michel Py [mic...@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us]
There is a good potential of conflict in the appreciation of the
negotiate in good faith thing, as the carrier with a majority of SIP
clients would not want to invest in the TDM hardware to connect, while
the carrier with a majority of
From: Simon Perreault [simon.perrea...@viagenie.ca]
On 2011-10-20 08:41, George, Wes wrote:
I'm also completely mystified as to why IPv6 support for all
proposed/requested features is not an explicitly stated requirement,
even at this phase.
And more generally, this should be
From: Michel Py [mic...@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us]
I'm no expert in this, but isn't this what ICMP Redirect messages
are for? Aren't routers required to generate them in these cases?
Unfortunately, ICMP redirects are often broken. It is a well-known issue
that the introduction of
From: Adam Novak [interf...@gmail.com]
Say I wanted to send data to my friend in the flat next to mine. It is
idiotic that nowadays, I would use the bottleneck subscriber line to
my upstream ISP and my crippled upload speed and push it all the way
across their infrastructure to my neighbors
From: Warren Kumari [war...@kumari.net]
And I've concluded that the IAOC have a crappy job to do and that folk like
to kvetch.
+1
The IAOC does a remarkably good job given the difficulty of the optimization
problem.
Just over the last two years, I'm amazed by the number of vastly
I have asked responsible parties about 2 of these cases (and,
for that matter, Dennis McCarthy about UT1) and the answer always is, too much
legacy equipment and software. That will sound quaint in 500 years.
We're still using the 360-degree circle and the 24 (=12+12) hour day, and those
go
From: Michael StJohns
Could you refresh my memory as to which hotels we stayed at had this
policy? I literally cannot remember having any hotel cancellation
policy with more than a single night fee ever.
Maastricht had particularly fierce cancellation rules. I don't
remember the details,
From: Thomas Nadeau
One would think that when the IETF negotiates the room block/fees,
that this could be done as well. After all we are in many cases,
booking a significant portion of the hotel in question in addition to
its conference facilities.
Speaking as someone who has never
From: Ole Jacobsen [o...@cisco.com]
When negotiating a group rate we actually ARE committing to buying a
certain number of rooms (the room block).
Are we really committing? Yes, the IETF block in the primary hotel
fills in my experience, but if it doesn't, is the IETF committing to
paying
From: Andrew Sullivan
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 01:08:29AM +0200, jefsey wrote:
However, the Internet MUST be supported by a
network/human oriented universal semiotic system.
I would like a defence of that claim. Speaking entirely personally, I
don't believe it.
Hmmm, my opinion is
From: Glen Zorn
I don't know how to interpret the term human trafficking here. Are
you suggesting that there are slave markets in front of the Sheraton
I am still trying to clear my mind of the vision of enslaved
IETFers... Given the difficulty many of us have convincing our
employers to
From: Hector Santos
I would like to propose that new I-D submissions include
information about the existence of a Working Group, if any,
and/or discussion group list address, if any, for to join
and participate in the development of the I-D or simply to
follow it.
We already have
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
working group
and could include its mailing list
From: Lars Eggert [lars.egg...@nokia.com]
*PRELIMINARY* Agenda
IRTF Open Meeting
Quebec City, Canada
July 11, 2011, 9:00 - 11:30 (tentative)
You say the meeting was 10 days ago and only the preliminary agenda is
available?
Dale
___
Ietf mailing
From: Yoav Nir [y...@checkpoint.com]
Very appropriate for XKCD to post this just a few days before an IETF
meeting.
http://www.xkcd.com/927/
And yet sometimes a standard will sweep away everything that was
before it.
One remarkably successful case is ASCII (containing the 26 letter
From: John C Klensin [john-i...@jck.com]
If sweep away is something that occurs after many years of
competing standards and a long period of time in which the
outcome was not clear, then sure.
Yes. In the sense that over the long run, the number of standards
that are commonly implemented
From: John C Klensin [john-i...@jck.com]
Randall Gellens ra...@qualcomm.com wrote:
At 6:19 PM -0400 7/13/11, John C Klensin wrote:
Content-type: text/noise;
noise-type=bogus-legal-disclaimer, charset=...
Ooh, I like this proposal. We can also have noise-types for
From: Thomas Heide Clausen [i...@thomasclausen.org]
For some of us, getting reimbursed for a higher meeting fee is
actually a lot easier than getting reimbursed for a higher
hotel-fee. Such would be the case when, for example, traveling on a
fixed per-diem intended for covering
OTOH, my cable ISP provider has an Expected IPv6 Transition Phases chart, in
which Phase 3 says, Customer Premesis Equipment (CPE) IP addressing: IPv6
only. And they've started trials of IPv6 already.
Dale
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
glassey [tglas...@earthlink.net]
Hmmm. Does the IETF publication license allow this? the commercial
resale of its documents?
There is no copyright notice on RFC 793, but it was published after
1976, so the question would revolve around the implicit license
involved in publishing RFCs at the
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sabahattin
Gucukoglu [m...@sabahattin-gucukoglu.com]
This is just a blog posting, but I think it has valid illustrative points of
the general frustration in it:
Given the stiff formality of many of the messages on this topic, and the
absence of
description of who did what and why, I suspect the problem is some sort of a
split
regarding what approach (or which particular solution) should be taken in OAM
for
MPLS. And that the two factions were probably
From: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon) [nurit.sprec...@nsn.com]
So far We did not see any justification for two competing solutions for
OAM in MPLS-TP.
No doubt you are correct.
But I will note that this
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sabahattin
Gucukoglu [m...@sabahattin-gucukoglu.com]
From Network World:
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/030411-ipv6-home-routers.html
Apple (except for their broken DHCPv6 client on
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org On Behalf Of Huub van Helvoort
On Friday October 2nd an agenda was distributed for the MEAD
team for the meeting in Munich on the MEAD team list m...@ietf.org.
On Monday October 5th an email was sent to m...@ietf.org
announcing the disbanding of the MEAD team,
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Shane Kerr
[sh...@isc.org]
My question is... how is this advice expected to trickle out into actual
use? There are more than 6000 RFCs, and they don't seem to be organized
in a useful way
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Andrew
Sullivan [a...@shinkuro.com]
how difficult it is to get things by idnits.
___
I would expect that the idnits rules change only very
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Henrik
Levkowetz [hen...@levkowetz.com]
Only errors will prevent an automatic draft submission from going through;
ignore the warnings and comments to your heart's content for that purpose.
Are you saying that one can order
From: Henrik Levkowetz [hen...@levkowetz.com]
This is at the top of the idnits output in submission checking mode:
Showing Errors (**), Warnings (==), and Comments (--).
Errors MUST be fixed before draft submission.
Are people complaining about the errors or the warnings?
It would
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Paul Hoffman
[paul.hoff...@vpnc.org]
So, I suspect that the large percentage of the non-00 drafts getting
kicked back are due to the IETF Trust requirements changing over
time. We can argue (and have argued!) about all that,
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sandy Ginoza
[sgin...@amsl.com]
Julian's numbers are good approximations; 50-60% of docs have XML source
files.
Rising fairly steadily, and approaching 70% in the most recent RFCs.
Dale
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org On Behalf Of Bob Hinden [bob.hin...@gmail.com]
The Statement of Work in the xml2rfc RFP was reviewed and modified
by the people on the tool-development list. [...]
There was an active discussion that resulted in many changes from
what was first proposed.
From: Russ Housley [hous...@vigilsec.com]
The xml2rfc tool was declared critical to the IETF because of the use by the
RFC Production Center.
Not because a large fraction of the draft authors use it?
Dale
On 2011-2-15, at 19:45, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
Noting the increasing length of the list
athttp://isoc.org/wp/worldipv6day/participants/
...I mostly note that I see very few eyeball ISPs on that list (with the
notable exception of two large US cable ISPs - great, guys!)
Turning on
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cullen
Jennings [flu...@cisco.com]
I am still not aware of any use case where this actually helps. I searched the
IETF and WG lists for email with the subject draft-ietf-sipcore-199 and I
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sabahattin
Gucukoglu [m...@sabahattin-gucukoglu.com]
My thought right now is perhaps of an OS update that includes a background
client which tries very hard to reduce the effect of breakage
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bob Hinden
[bob.hin...@gmail.com]
Wasn't the official definition of the meter also tied to Paris?
___
The original measurement was done on a
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Phillip
Hallam-Baker [hal...@gmail.com]
I believe that my personal security trumps any and all considerations that
might be raised here.
I do not give my home address out and do not intend
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell
[d...@ewellic.org]
The argument that personal information is necessary to distinguish the
author from other people with the same name probably carries some weight
for authors
I've attempted to subscribe to the xml2rfc mailing list several times in the
last month, but never gotten a response. Is it still working?
Dale
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mykyta
Yevstifeyev [evniki...@gmail.com]
Mentioning my full contact data makes no sense. I can hardly imagine
that somebody will come to Ukraine, search Kotovsk (that is rather small
town)
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alessandro
Vesely [ves...@tana.it]
I've never attended an IETF meeting. Why? Because it seems to me quite
unlikely to have a chance to say something useful by going there. I mean
useful
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of John Levine
[jo...@iecc.com]
This seems like a document that might interest some on this list...
It's not bad, but it's basically a well written summary of the
conventional wisdom about
From: Sam Hartman [hartmans-i...@mit.edu]
I think the bar of producing an internet draft is low
enough. Regardless of what mechanisms we adopt to give people a chance
to try and sell their drafts, I think it is critical that we require the
drafts to be
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Chris Elliott
[chell...@pobox.com]
I strongly agree here. Encourage .11a (5ghz) usage, disable .11n for the .11b/g
2.4ghz spectrum. We also have the luxury of a large number of repeat
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Andrew
Sullivan [...@shinkuro.com]
I find it slightly astonishing that the RFC Editor's instuctions on
URLs don't require a visited-on parameter. Just about every academic
style guide
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of lauri
[lauri.vosa...@gmail.com]
Generally I think it would be good idea to have UNIX domain socket
redirection in Secure Shell standard because the difference between
TCP/IP redirection code
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Marshall
Eubanks [...@americafree.tv]
Wearing no hats, and just my own personal opinion, this seems like making a
mountain out of a molehill to me.
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of David
Harrington [ietf...@comcast.net]
I said (feel free to check the session recording, (ch3-fri-am 1:25),
which is where I got the following text from):
I want to make sure you do not spend a tremendous amount of time
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Samuel Weiler
[weiler+i...@watson.org]
At the IAOC open mike yesterday, I observed that the above
announcement was made with no explanation, with no advance warning,
and with no opportunity
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Peter
Saint-Andre [stpe...@stpeter.im]
The statement I heard at the plenary was that the local host told us
that we needed to enforce badge checking. I'm not concerned about badge
checking. I'm concerned about the precedent of
From: wgchairs-boun...@ietf.org [wgchairs-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Russ
Housley [hous...@vigilsec.com]
The deadline for BOF requests comes too soon after the end of one IETF
meeting for the next one. We are hearing complaints, and subjectively,
the
___
From: Ross Callon [rcal...@juniper.net]
Thus [BOF proposals] take more time to evaluate [than requests for WG sessions].
I'm sure that's true. But that doesn't change the fact that a useful BOF idea
is likely to
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alexandru
Petrescu [alexandru.petre...@gmail.com]
I am trying to figure out how close is hotel Nikko to Shangri-La? Is
this within walking distance? Is there a protected pedestrian allay I
In regard to making it easier for the naive to find and use the various IETF
tools:
I notice that there are *two* sets of IETF tools. One is titled IETF Web
Tools (http://www.ietf.org/tools/), and contains a link to IETF Community
Tools (http://www.ietf.org/tools/tools.html) as well as
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Livingood,
Jason [jason_living...@cable.comcast.com]
It seems the press struggles to understand that the IETF does
technical standards and not business models.
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
