> The IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) will hold a session
> from 1500-1650 in
> Potsdam 1 at the Berlin IETF on Sunday July 28, 2013. The purpose is to
> provide an
> overview of the IAOC to allow the community to better understand what
> the IAOC does, how
> the finances work, venu
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Hui Deng wrote:
> Hi Ted,
>
> I did explain them in the 1st paragraph about minorities (not mentioned
> that they could have two kids in mainland)
> anyway, I will revise the title by adding "Chinese "Han" people", hope
> that will be ok
>
> -Hui
>
>
>
While it is
This is a reminder that the Internet Draft Submission cut-off is today, Monday,
July 15, 2013.
All submissions are due by UTC 24:00.
All drafts can be uploaded using the ID submission tool located here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/
The Internet-Draft cutoff dates as well as other signi
Wes,
On Jul 15, 2013, at 5:13 AM, "George, Wes" wrote:
>> The IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) will hold a session
>> from 1500-1650 in
>> Potsdam 1 at the Berlin IETF on Sunday July 28, 2013. The purpose is to
>> provide an
>> overview of the IAOC to allow the community to better
AB,
>
> IMO the questions/comments that may be ok to see added to discuss are:
>
> 1) Venue selection and operation of the IETF meetings
>
> - Selection of the current venue and was there difficulties until
> getting to this meeting session time. From the managing meeting
> (pro
I submitted a draft related to this issue last year.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yao-dnsop-tld-names-00
In this draft, I called this kind of names as TLD names instead of dotless
domains.
Jiankang Yao
From: Dave Crocker
Date: 2013-07-11 05:39
To: ietf
CC: IETF Discussion
Subject: R
On 07/14/2013 10:05 PM, S Moonesamy wrote:
At 06:53 14-07-2013, Yoav Nir wrote:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moonesamy-dotless-domains-00
That memo discusses about the case of the dotless domains in terms of
the technical standards. Comments are welcome.
Interesting, but pardon my being
> And the -05 version includes the text to address that editorial nit - it's
> ready for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC. Many thanks to the authors
> for productively addressing the review comments.
And many thanks to you, David, for your review. Based on this review and my own
review o
