All -
At the behest of the IAOC, I recently published a draft:
"Tasks previously assigned to the IETF Executive Director"
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lynch-execd-tasks-00.txt
Which was intended to tidy up some issues left over from our
pre-BCP 101 days:
"BCP 101 [RFC4071] requ
Lucy,
It seems to me that anything that the IAOC feels able to do
without formally asking for community consensus is a candidate
for an ION unless its significance is so broad that permanent/
archival RFC documentation is appropriate. I believe that IAOC
should be able to make that decision,
At 1:39 PM -0800 2/16/07, Lucy Lynch wrote:
So, my question to the community, as the author of this admittedly
pitiful draft is:
Should I withdraw the draft and publish it as an IAOC approved ION?
Yes. It is a great use of IONs.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
_
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, John C Klensin wrote:
Lucy,
It seems to me that anything that the IAOC feels able to do without formally
asking for community consensus is a candidate for an ION unless its
significance is so broad that permanent/ archival RFC documentation is
appropriate. I believe tha
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 14:40:12 -0800 (PST)
Lucy Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sign me up! Is there a secret handshake? Do I get to wear a fez?
>
We use public key handshakes these days. And it's f(e)^z. All of this
is spelled out in the Security Considerations section of that club.
ch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Cc: ipr-wg@ietf.org
Subject: Request for input (patchwork RFCs)
All -
At the behest of the IAOC, I recently published a draft:
"Tasks previously assigned to the IETF Executive Director"
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lynch-exe
