psuger wrote:
Dear colleagues,
I am a member of a lead user project planning to run real live RFID
use tests. This test intends to use the [RFC 5395] Private Use 0xFFF0,
65520 Class as "PERFID" (for Provisional Experimentation RFID) since
there is no Experimentation Classes assigned.
Mssr Su
On Tuesday, March 27, 2007 02:42:19 PM -0700 Andy Bierman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There are so many Process Wonks in the IETF who feel it is their
sworn duty to yell "State your name please!"
I guess I am one of those process wonks.
In the PCN meeting last week, I was taking notes, a feed
Philip Guenther wrote:
On Mar 27, 2007, at 8:10 PM, Andy Bierman wrote:
...
I find it rather annoying to listen to the constant interruptions,
reminding people of the process. The only reasons for such an
interruption are:
...
2) you plan to base your opinion of the imminent comment on eithe
On Mar 27, 2007, at 8:10 PM, Andy Bierman wrote:
...
> I find it rather annoying to listen to the constant interruptions,
> reminding people of the process. The only reasons for such an
> interruption are:
...
> 2) you plan to base your opinion of the imminent comment on either
> who says it
> "Andy" == Andy Bierman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andy> I find it rather annoying to listen to the constant
Andy> interruptions, reminding people of the process. The only
Andy> reasons for such an interruption are:
Andy> 1) it is very important to you that detailed and ac
age-
> From: Marshall Eubanks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 8:49 PM
> To: Andy Bierman
> Cc: ietf@ietf.org; Jeffrey Hutzelman
> Subject: Re: RFID
>
> Speaking as a frequent scribe, I consider it good manners for
> speakers to identify themselves,
Speaking as a frequent scribe, I consider it good manners for
speakers to identify themselves, even
if they are well known.
Regards
Marshall
On Mar 27, 2007, at 8:10 PM, Andy Bierman wrote:
Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
On Tuesday, March 27, 2007 03:51:56 PM -0700 Andy Bierman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED
Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
On Tuesday, March 27, 2007 03:51:56 PM -0700 Andy Bierman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonk_%28slang%29
According to wikipedia, a policy wonk is
someone knowledgeable about and fascinated by details of government
policy and programs
If t
On Tuesday, March 27, 2007 03:51:56 PM -0700 Andy Bierman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonk_%28slang%29
According to wikipedia, a policy wonk is
someone knowledgeable about and fascinated by details of government
policy and programs
If that is derogatory then I'm
Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
On Tuesday, March 27, 2007 02:42:19 PM -0700 Andy Bierman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There are so many Process Wonks in the IETF who feel it
is their sworn duty to yell "State your name please!"
I think it's unfair to call people who do that "process wonks" or any
On Tuesday, March 27, 2007 02:42:19 PM -0700 Andy Bierman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There are so many Process Wonks in the IETF who feel it
is their sworn duty to yell "State your name please!"
I think it's unfair to call people who do that "process wonks" or any other
derogatory term.
Schliesser, Benson wrote:
Eric-
It sounds like your argument is: "We're too incompetent to say our names
at the mic, so we're probably too incompetent to use a RFID system."
Did I get that right?
This sounds like a Rube Goldberg joke, not a serious thread.
Could we possibly find a more o
Steven M. Bellovin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> "Schliesser, Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On the other hand, I am amused by your idea of scanning the streets
> > for RFID responses that look like IETF-badges. Then my robot army
> > could track down and kill all IETF participants
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 11:27:29 -0500
"Schliesser, Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Eric-
>
> It sounds like your argument is: "We're too incompetent to say our
> names at the mic, so we're probably too incompetent to use a RFID
> system." Did I get that right?
>
> While I'm certainly not goi
net! Or maybe I could just use them for some fun practical
jokes instead...
Cheers,
-Benson
From: Eric Gray (LO/EUS) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 4:56 PM
To: Andrew G. Malis
Cc: ietf@ietf
arify.
Cheers,
-Benson
From: Eric Gray (LO/EUS) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 5:49 PM
To: Schliesser, Benson
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: RFID (was: identifying yourself at th
Forgive me for not sharing the American enthusiasm for such technologies.
I note that while the US election systems stagger from one fiasco to the next
there British electoral technology based on paper ballots, pens and human
counters/scrutinizers is considerably cheaper to operate and has not
csson
From: Schliesser, Benson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 12:27 PM
To: Eric Gray (LO/EUS)
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: RFID (was: identifying yourself at the mic)
Importance: High
is [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 11:45 AM
To: Eric Gray (LO/EUS)
Cc: David Morris; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: RFID (was: identifying yourself at the mic)
Importance: High
Eric,
Why not? We ea
Eric,
Why not? We each already receive a unique identifier when we register for
the meeting - all the RFID tag needs to contain is that identifier, no
personal info is required.
There could also be an opt-in locator service to let other attendees look up
what meeting room you're in at that time.
Excellent idea - NOT!!!
All we need is something else to wrap in aluminum foil...
Thanks!
--
Eric Gray
Principal Engineer
Ericsson
From: Andrew G. Malis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 10:55 AM
To: David
Daniel,
I wasn't at the BoF so if I understand your question correctly, ZigBee
and RFID are very different solutions for very different applications -
remote monitoring, control, sensory applications vs. automatic
identification (at the highest level). As such, the standardization
around the acces
In 61st IETF meeting, a new BOF as IPv6 over 802.15.4 (ZigBee)
was
held and many guys were of interest. I am wondering of what explicit
issues are available arounding RFID against previous work.
Please let me know it if I am missing anything.--- Original Message ---Sender : Scott Barvic
On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 10:52, Richard Shockey wrote:
> EPCglobal is focusing on the standards though I suspect there are aspects
> of the protocols being discussed that should come to the IETF or IEEE for
> proper peer review and/or standardization. There is an extensive discussion
> of the use o
24 matches
Mail list logo
