headers
Romascanu, Dan (Dan | 9 Sep 2009 17:01
Favicon

FW: Nomcom 2009-10: Important Reminder: Call for Nominations, Local Office hours, Nominee Questionnaires available


-----Original Message-----
From: iesg-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Mary Barnes
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 5:47 PM
To: Working Group Chairs
Subject: FW: Nomcom 2009-10: Important Reminder: Call for
Nominations,Local Office hours, Nominee Questionnaires available 

Hi all,

Thanks to the ADs and chairs that forwarded the previous reminder to
their mailing lists. I would appreciate it if other chairs and ADs could
do so, since we are really in need of more nominations.

Thanks,
Mary. 

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-announce-bounces <at> ietf.org
[mailto:ietf-announce-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf Of Barnes, Mary
(RICH2:AR00)
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 9:38 AM
To: IETF Announcement list
Cc: ietf <at> ietf.org
Subject: Nomcom 2009-10: Important Reminder: Call for Nominations, Local
Office hours, Nominee Questionnaires available 

Hi all,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Romascanu, Dan (Dan | 17 Sep 2009 10:39
Favicon

FW: Nomcom 2009-10: FINAL Call for Nominations, Local Office hours, Nominee Questionnaires


-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Mary Barnes
Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 6:07 AM
To: IETF Announcement list
Cc: ietf <at> ietf.org
Subject: Nomcom 2009-10: FINAL Call for Nominations, Local Office hours,
Nominee Questionnaires 

Hi all,

This is the Final Call for Nominations - the nominations period ends in
two days on Sept 18, 2009.  

We do not have a sufficient number of nominations for the following AD
positions:
APP, OPS, RAI and SEC

In addition, we have not received responses from almost half of the
nominees. I will be sending reminders for all the outstanding
nominations.

We need Community input and participation!!! We cannot properly execute
the task of selecting the best candidates for these positions with so
few accepted nominations.  So, please consider making nominations for
the open positions, in particular those for which we have so few
nominations - it takes just a few minutes of your time. Right now, we
just need the names/email addresses - we'll be soliciting feedback
later.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Romascanu, Dan (Dan | 17 Sep 2009 12:38
Favicon

FW: IESG Statement on Copyright


-----Original Message-----
From: iesg-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf Of
IESG Secretary
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 10:45 PM
To: ietf-announce <at> ietf.org
Cc: wgchairs <at> ietf.org; ietf <at> ietf.org
Subject: IESG Statement on Copyright 

This IESG Statement obsoletes all earlier IESG Statements regarding
Copyright statements in MIB and PIB Modules.

The IESG is providing this guidance to align current practice with RFC
5377, RFC 5378, and the resulting IETF Trust Legal Provisions (TLP)
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).

IETF Contributions and IETF Documents often include code components that
are intended to be directly processed by a computer. Examples of such
code components include ABNF definitions, XML Schemas, XML DTDs, XML
RelaxNG definitions, tables of values, MIBs, PIBs, ASN.1, and classical
programming source code. The IETF Trust maintains a list of code
component types. A link to this list can be found on this web
page: http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info.

In addition to the code component types listed, any text found between
the markers &lt;CODE BEGINS&gt; and &lt;CODE ENDS&gt; shall be
considered a code component. Authors may wish to use these markers as
clear delimiters of code components.

Authors are encouraged to collect code into a separate section or
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 13 comments |
headers
Romascanu, Dan (Dan | 22 Sep 2009 14:48
Favicon

Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: IESG Statement on Copyright

There are a number of issues that gathered around 4181 that would
deserve attention if a willing editor is found. 

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mib-doctors-bounces <at> ietf.org 
> [mailto:mib-doctors-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf Of C. M. Heard
> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 12:48 AM
> To: MIB Doctors (E-mail)
> Cc: OPS Area (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: IESG Statement on Copyright
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> It seems to me that the new IESG statement on MIB and PIB 
> module copyrights obsoletes Section 3.7 of RFC 4181 
> (Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of MIB Documents) and 
> all of RFC 4841 (RFC 4181 Update to Recognize the IETF 
> Trust).  If the cycles exist to do it, someone should write a 
> short RFC to update RFC 4181 and to obsolete RFC 4841, or 
> even better, issue an upated version of the mib guidelines 
> that obsoletes both 4181 and 4841.
> 
> Just in case anyone should ask, I'm stil retired from MIB 
> work, and I don't have the cycles to do it myself.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Mike Heard
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 11 comments |
headers
Juergen Schoenwaelder | 22 Sep 2009 14:54
Picon
Favicon

Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: IESG Statement on Copyright

On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 02:48:03PM +0200, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:

> There are a number of issues that gathered around 4181 that would
> deserve attention if a willing editor is found. 

Do we have a list of those issues somewhere?

--

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
Permalink | Reply | 10 comments |
headers
Romascanu, Dan (Dan | 22 Sep 2009 15:00
Favicon

Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: IESG Statement on Copyright

Nothing as ordered as we would it to be. I remember discussions having
started a few times but we need to go back into the MIB Doctors
archives. There are also three verified errata (editorial stuff). 

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder 
> [mailto:j.schoenwaelder <at> jacobs-university.de] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 3:55 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: C. M. Heard; MIB Doctors (E-mail); OPS Area (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [OPS-AREA] [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: IESG Statement on Copyright
> 
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 02:48:03PM +0200, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> 
> > There are a number of issues that gathered around 4181 that would 
> > deserve attention if a willing editor is found.
> 
> Do we have a list of those issues somewhere?
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>
Permalink | Reply | 9 comments |
headers
C. M. Heard | 21 Sep 2009 23:47
Picon
Favicon

Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: IESG Statement on Copyright

Greetings,

It seems to me that the new IESG statement on MIB and PIB module 
copyrights obsoletes Section 3.7 of RFC 4181 (Guidelines for Authors 
and Reviewers of MIB Documents) and all of RFC 4841 (RFC 4181 Update 
to Recognize the IETF Trust).  If the cycles exist to do it, someone 
should write a short RFC to update RFC 4181 and to obsolete RFC 
4841, or even better, issue an upated version of the mib guidelines 
that obsoletes both 4181 and 4841.

Just in case anyone should ask, I'm stil retired from MIB work, and 
I don't have the cycles to do it myself.

Best regards,

Mike Heard

On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: iesg-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> IESG Secretary
> Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 10:45 PM
> To: ietf-announce <at> ietf.org
> Cc: wgchairs <at> ietf.org; ietf <at> ietf.org
> Subject: IESG Statement on Copyright 
> 
> This IESG Statement obsoletes all earlier IESG Statements regarding
> Copyright statements in MIB and PIB Modules.
> 
> The IESG is providing this guidance to align current practice with RFC
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 12 comments |
headers
C. M. Heard | 22 Sep 2009 23:30
Picon
Favicon

Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: IESG Statement on Copyright

Other than the copyright text that goes in MIB modules, the only 
issues that I know of that we all agreed were actually issues are 
the errata now on the RFC Editor site.  Attached is an e-mail 
message on this subject sent to David Harrington and Bert Wijnen 
earlier this year.

In my archives I found a discussion that tooks place between 16 Oct 
2005 and 4 Jan 2006 as to whether RFC 4181 should be listed as 
updating STD 58 (RFCs 2578, 2579, and 2580), as suggested by Alfred 
Hoenes.  We decided that the answer was NO, but in the process there 
was an inconclusive discussion as to whether the MUSTs in 4181 that 
go beyond the requirements of STD 58 (there are some in sec. 4.6.4) 
ought to be SHOULDs instead.  The subject lines in the relevant 
threads are "RFC 4181 indeed updates RFC 2578..2580" and "Erratum 
for RFC 4181".  If it's too much of a pain to search the mib-doctors 
archive, I can make the 28 messages that I saved from those threads 
available as a Unix mbox file.

Mike Heard

On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> Nothing as ordered as we would it to be. I remember discussions having
> started a few times but we need to go back into the MIB Doctors
> archives. There are also three verified errata (editorial stuff). 
> 
> Dan
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 8 comments |
headers
Romascanu, Dan (Dan | 23 Sep 2009 10:14
Favicon

Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: IESG Statement on Copyright

I have some good news to share. Randy Presuhn stepped ahead and accepted
to be the editor of 4181bis. Thanks, Randy!

I have two questions: 

1. OPSAWG (which did not exist by the time 4181 was edited and
published) seems to me to be the natural home for 4181bis. Does anybody
see any problem with this? If all agree we shall move discussions to
opsawg <at> ietf.org

2.  What should be the scope of 4181bis? 

Thanks and Regards,

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: C. M. Heard [mailto:heard <at> pobox.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 12:31 AM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: Juergen Schoenwaelder; MIB Doctors (E-mail); OPS Area (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] [OPS-AREA] FW: IESG Statement on Copyright
> 
> Other than the copyright text that goes in MIB modules, the 
> only issues that I know of that we all agreed were actually 
> issues are the errata now on the RFC Editor site.  Attached 
> is an e-mail message on this subject sent to David Harrington 
> and Bert Wijnen earlier this year.
> 
> In my archives I found a discussion that tooks place between 16 Oct
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 6 comments |
headers
Romascanu, Dan (Dan | 23 Sep 2009 10:26
Favicon

Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: IESG Statement on Copyright


> -----Original Message-----
> From: C. M. Heard [mailto:heard <at> pobox.com] 

> 
> In my archives I found a discussion that tooks place between 16 Oct
> 2005 and 4 Jan 2006 as to whether RFC 4181 should be listed 
> as updating STD 58 (RFCs 2578, 2579, and 2580), as suggested 
> by Alfred Hoenes.  We decided that the answer was NO, but in 
> the process there was an inconclusive discussion as to 
> whether the MUSTs in 4181 that go beyond the requirements of 
> STD 58 (there are some in sec. 4.6.4) ought to be SHOULDs 
> instead.  The subject lines in the relevant threads are "RFC 
> 4181 indeed updates RFC 2578..2580" and "Erratum for RFC 
> 4181".  If it's too much of a pain to search the mib-doctors 
> archive, I can make the 28 messages that I saved from those 
> threads available as a Unix mbox file.
> 
> Mike Heard
> 

This was the conversation that I also had in mind, although for some
reasons I remembered it being more dramatic than it looks to me now. 

Dan
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane