In message <86172038-8f62-4508-8199-be4c16906...@kumari.net>, Warren Kumari
writes:
>
> On May 2, 2013, at 9:56 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> >
> > In message <5182828c.3040...@isdg.net>, Hector Santos writes:
> >> Mr. Resnick, for the record, I wasn't upset. Believe it or not, I was
> >> actuall
On May 2, 2013, at 9:56 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> In message <5182828c.3040...@isdg.net>, Hector Santos writes:
>> Mr. Resnick, for the record, I wasn't upset. Believe it or not, I was
>> actually applying an suggestion posted last month or so here with the
>> IETF diversity talks to help
In message <8d23d4052abe7a4490e77b1a012b63077516d...@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>,
Ted Lemon writes:
> On May 2, 2013, at 9:56 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > How do we deal with sites?
> > How do we deal with vendors that ship such product?
>
> I say we punch 'em.
>
> Seriously, the IETF doesn't have an
On May 2, 2013, at 9:56 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> How do we deal with sites?
> How do we deal with vendors that ship such product?
I say we punch 'em.
Seriously, the IETF doesn't have an enforcement arm. It's up to buyers to
check to see that what they are buying is protocol compliant, and of
In message <5182828c.3040...@isdg.net>, Hector Santos writes:
> Mr. Resnick, for the record, I wasn't upset. Believe it or not, I was
> actually applying an suggestion posted last month or so here with the
> IETF diversity talks to help get a major WG issue resolved, one with a
> near surety o
Mr. Resnick, for the record, I wasn't upset. Believe it or not, I was
actually applying an suggestion posted last month or so here with the
IETF diversity talks to help get a major WG issue resolved, one with a
near surety of an appeal, resolved and addressed much faster and hence
avoid a wast
