From Ted.Lemon@nominum.com Sat Feb 1 15:11:21 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBD241A000C for ; Sat, 1 Feb 2014 15:11:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 56hcHhh-wMGR for ; Sat, 1 Feb 2014 15:11:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from exprod7og109.obsmtp.com (exprod7og109.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.171]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC8BB1A0009 for ; Sat, 1 Feb 2014 15:11:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob109.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUu1/FB3YBzB2gGepFDqV0e5SL4cBoHOg@postini.com; Sat, 01 Feb 2014 15:11:16 PST Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EB241B830D for ; Sat, 1 Feb 2014 15:11:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E199190052; Sat, 1 Feb 2014 15:11:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.10.40] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Sat, 1 Feb 2014 15:11:10 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Ted Lemon In-Reply-To: <52E17BE5.9020502@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2014 18:11:06 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <1D011C73-8894-4EC4-A13C-2BF04C828070@nominum.com> References: <52E17BE5.9020502@gmail.com> To: Alexandru Petrescu X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10] Cc: "" Subject: Re: [geonet/its] updated text of Charter X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2014 23:11:22 -0000 On Jan 23, 2014, at 3:30 PM, Alexandru Petrescu = wrote: > What do you think? Better. Thanks. From alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com Wed Feb 5 02:19:59 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 896061A00C3 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 02:19:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.983 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.983 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ft4yjDCpZFLQ for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 02:19:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFA301A00BE for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 02:19:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id s15AJtpt013479 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 11:19:55 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id BAC7A202E9B for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 11:20:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet2.intra.cea.fr (muguet2.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.7]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8C2A200C25 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 11:20:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (is010446-4.intra.cea.fr [10.8.33.116]) by muguet2.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id s15AJmSu012602 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 11:19:55 +0100 Message-ID: <52F21044.3050209@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 11:19:48 +0100 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "its@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [geonet/its] Request for feedback on the Charter proposal: communication models X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 10:19:59 -0000 Hello geonetters, Please provide feedback about the Charter proposal: https://github.com/MelindaShore/geonet/blob/master/charterproposal.txt In particular, we need to clarify the communication models. Dissemination to a geographical area assumes a Source node in the Internet sending packets to receivers in a small area. Goods tracking assumes a little bit the reverse. Instrumented ambulance would be also reversely sending, but in yet another manner (from ambulance to hospitals, if I understand correctly). Mobile RSU would be disseminating from one area to another area (not from Source to area). Privacy-conditioned identification of originating area would be again different. What do you think? Alex From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Wed Feb 5 16:17:15 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A8DA1A029F for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 16:17:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pD2HPq_ME60J for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 16:17:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yh0-x232.google.com (mail-yh0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B370F1A021F for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 16:17:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yh0-f50.google.com with SMTP id 29so1295524yhl.37 for ; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 16:17:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=FFw6sPcEo1Cy1c1GKmk8usEVVb5CMKjbsL+FPRvgqxk=; b=f96afPGoHlA+T/2cfZu1w3cPbGxOSpNN1im49qP46UrE2QfpVvss3nBRabzbFvC9au vlcrBikMaUD/mEl5+uUUr9yorcJZvbfnWnklyLQbn76F3twv1PN89fdqiqeH+SDfgqT9 3M/D0SEEpWJ1ZcIVy9qBmfFYAV4RArJYoF4oJGqKb0s+SxSZcyyf0RbQV5gEz/8Pzy0B GBf/eYtaJKKja9JQC43Gn7+W7cnyGu8UmkFS9b5ppbGFbIfKkZGIiFl1McOgvpFOsMJq StIBfoydwkdCOrayIRFYuY1GCTbIidA6sclz17nY4JaEjwJbGsTYIdPgLVAmIoFc9yWG Jf0w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.120.135 with SMTP id p7mr2238846yhh.155.1391645832709; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 16:17:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.170.220.213 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 16:17:11 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52E1D8C6.7040104@gmail.com> References: <52E1D8C6.7040104@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 01:17:11 +0100 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Melinda Shore Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: its@ietf.org Subject: Re: [geonet/its] Update and question X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 00:17:15 -0000 Hi Melinda, On 1/24/14, Melinda Shore wrote: > Hi, all: > > (Question at the bottom) > > As things currently stand, our request for a BOF in London > has been turned down. I think this is the second time, with no good reason, last time turn down I had to ask why, and now I have to ask again (may be every one already knows why it was turned down). AB From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Wed Feb 5 16:53:48 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DC661A021D for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 16:53:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6A5Y5GiETywN for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 16:53:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yk0-x22b.google.com (mail-yk0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1DC21A011B for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 16:53:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yk0-f171.google.com with SMTP id 142so3143931ykq.2 for ; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 16:53:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=KCBHllpTqmRFm+SY+VHtajpow+x/0L0C2FIqkhP+5aY=; b=EjA1Ys2hTVQmIQlTXb+YJ6iunbzlPU1yGYVK++Dyt52+pXtyA1fGU9sItVA6FKsOJD R+fkQktT7Mzg962+wC4z9vQBS6CWP6zLmodVR1lUX5RmaDW1RsDX5vH6rHXztbsgL8L4 9kkxOT8Ugfbf/qxR1AMWMi+WKWV5WbesiYpzNaKdbXU0cmbFlysiwQenwbpYRCb2/gg+ B1C0w+gzKkjGwrbJHEQmDKzJ0xO1/5eAGuMdiWfj8vJKQ44v1BxLZiQXZeqj6GQjorNQ xgthdHjCSdb8zjKtwIR5aEg8hBOZM6i9QO0bspvW3r82OEnpVNOjMOvdb2L4EkRT7r2R 3MCA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.127.39 with SMTP id c27mr3507821yhi.120.1391648025846; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 16:53:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.170.220.213 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 16:53:45 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52A34E3D.4060709@gmail.com> References: <1384545093.17997.61.camel@localhost> <52A1EB4D.6020401@gmail.com> <1386350571.14003.38.camel@localhost> <52A34E3D.4060709@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 01:53:45 +0100 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Alexandru Petrescu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Rex Buddenberg , Nabil Benamar , karagian@cs.utwente.nl, its@ietf.org Subject: Re: [geonet/its] app-layer or network-layer problem X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 00:53:48 -0000 On 12/7/13, Alexandru Petrescu wrote: > we still need to better identify what we need to deal with > here. That must be network-layer, in relationship with geography, and > with the Internet (geonet). > I think it should be a problem solved by both network and transport layers. AB From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Wed Feb 5 17:31:46 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2A971A0219 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 17:31:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4YOGk_VWXPxg for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 17:31:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yk0-x22d.google.com (mail-yk0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01F081A01D6 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 17:31:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yk0-f173.google.com with SMTP id 20so3270051yks.4 for ; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 17:31:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=s4dZSORy+s6DT0vC5G7jEafSZHtPxlpdUVnj0yZldu0=; b=HHkqG/aSj5plI2C+4C+L3CGHvV7zOnNBLA8uKKi240f/ucblFbDqtS92MF64EmAaT0 V0ajIsRbnPC/Z7GqE3IBjwxUTVE9AZprYtSF8IW1PWkpoOWZmF1dR8EVZsRGoDG1XOnd 2watrdXITgBKJIHiuLLgpqUvbXrMdhdqMiDMU5ChM7qn8+sIU6uuMbaOW6fo71GgRl62 mRzSv+OTPKTzv/fNIQ+4DH6+w6BsMJjDyskO81thGdVlN0r96vW+PAEbQSn4c+ldt7xt YF3+hPfGZCUq/LN4THOT1toHQIT8vrwvDPC9rNG122xiGMSy7FBIlxG6eDM1JYIPSoUN jGrg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.83.194 with SMTP id q42mr4202933yhe.56.1391650304080; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 17:31:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.170.220.213 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 17:31:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52F21044.3050209@gmail.com> References: <52F21044.3050209@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 02:31:41 +0100 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Alexandru Petrescu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: "its@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [geonet/its] Request for feedback on the Charter proposal: communication models X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 01:31:47 -0000 On 2/5/14, Alexandru Petrescu wrote: > Hello geonetters, > > Please provide feedback about the Charter proposal: > https://github.com/MelindaShore/geonet/blob/master/charterproposal.txt > > In particular, we need to clarify the communication models. I agree, > > Dissemination to a geographical area assumes a Source node in the > Internet sending packets to receivers in a small area. > > Goods tracking assumes a little bit the reverse. Why we separate them (dissemination and tracking)? they may happen in the same time for same nodes and areas. So we need nodes that are doing both tracking information and dissemination of other information. > > Instrumented ambulance would be also reversely sending, but in yet > another manner (from ambulance to hospitals, if I understand correctly). > > Mobile RSU would be disseminating from one area to another area (not > from Source to area). > > Privacy-conditioned identification of originating area would be again > different. > I think we need to add satellite router communication to be involved in the geonet/its, because the Internet systems are usually on the Earth but if there is a big problem on Earth in one area then the Internet fails to communicate with that area, and only the Space can make ITS work. AB From melinda.shore@gmail.com Thu Feb 6 12:33:37 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FF431A04FA for ; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 12:33:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jd6nFPZMkEV3 for ; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 12:33:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pd0-x22a.google.com (mail-pd0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C74CF1A04FB for ; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 12:33:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pd0-f170.google.com with SMTP id p10so2189508pdj.1 for ; Thu, 06 Feb 2014 12:33:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=7J3X8yGP32SjYsKJGLASFyLDD3Wu66ndtTxVHm5mtGE=; b=uJ/LTYbWAxY1AvHRfiajK6FjC3E0aIjuXKN5QjWDziAi43Dh7uPiYdibr6R+6bSjdB CRW5s2Kuug6Zzw3Hpici7Dhz6UY9dg3KhctqkVE2xlxBp/uJJ5wwm1/0cxYz7SrFuQHj OA0gkdbjIZ7VTfbMknZxpQMqChQjdL/Ky500b2w0goMq9Nv7TRrbdCiF72KiE5eHfldN Q88pJZ7+L/g9vrmMTc6PfP26co3cWa5NBu5gB6h6oe6Sp8aZq1ifl2BUlMk8D7vhloFM QtarXyeFCZo1O4yKgUe+dE2QeSPJQ7O6h0IJWINTOf3luPWPYgqKomPcvARiq8I5+4La BVVg== X-Received: by 10.68.226.9 with SMTP id ro9mr14946955pbc.72.1391718814762; Thu, 06 Feb 2014 12:33:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from spandex.local (216-67-29-177-rb2.sol.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [216.67.29.177]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id nu10sm6436362pbb.16.2014.02.06.12.33.32 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 06 Feb 2014 12:33:33 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <52F3F19A.1080100@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 11:33:30 -0900 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: its@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [geonet/its] geonet get-together in London X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 20:33:37 -0000 Hi, all: Although we will not be meeting as a scheduled BOF in London we would like to have an informal side-meeting to try to firm up the charter proposal, clarify communication models, and settle on some agreed-upon use cases. We're trying to choose a time that works for both key participants and for interested parties, and I've created a Doodle scheduling poll here: http://doodle.com/e8zdg5vt3czv2rad. Please let us know your availability, and leave comments to what would work for you if none of the listed times do. Thanks, Melinda and Alex From melinda.shore@gmail.com Fri Feb 7 09:25:01 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 133481ACCF6 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:25:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bfWO6EjNmzeW for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:24:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pb0-x233.google.com (mail-pb0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EEA41ACCF5 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:24:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pb0-f51.google.com with SMTP id un15so3509422pbc.24 for ; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 09:24:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=jOqGikmv2v/CCx906+dDhpRvEsxHv56jUOvPx0xA4pE=; b=y5SOvT5yq5VmEjBn20g9KYNmQB2vTzW2h7H4/lAoBTtkXytzo5jG//mCpOMCGRPFnq AwEZTdjAZZFg4PvwppoAr+FeLKIbpPgB9k+znMPtTApt8iH1SO1+lqIPo2gCgMZVuibF ALWhjj59JSY8A0GnUOosp9zH79+yTxkqbdjwCLGi2FklR7rWT8htACi/aqBC+XTPhFXc iE7wlnSdUeZQNrO1kD70CTHsApyI4Be4THPnMmp7lwJ1jDZxaPSFS9emAM6OHyFF5n4v tSjWtjigvGNzoOdmyu+B6dbZw2dSQiO1A9yd2QkyEFZgUdJNUpHF5bPlQpJvYy/h2GeC fCfA== X-Received: by 10.68.202.225 with SMTP id kl1mr21235262pbc.54.1391793897245; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 09:24:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from spandex.local (216-67-29-177-rb2.sol.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [216.67.29.177]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ei4sm15467222pbb.42.2014.02.07.09.24.55 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 07 Feb 2014 09:24:56 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <52F516E5.7030305@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 08:24:53 -0900 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: its@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [geonet/its] Current geonet charter X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 17:25:01 -0000 I've appended a copy of the current state of the geonet charter. As things currently stand we will not be having a formal BOF in London but we are moving towards getting a working group chartered, hopefully by Toronto, and will be having an informal side-meeting in London to try to firm up the charter proposal and problem statement. We are looking for feedback on and discussion of the charter text. Thanks, Melinda and Alex GeoNet BoF at IETF Charter Proposal January 23rd, 2014 https://github.com/MelindaShore/geonet/wiki Internet-Wide GeoNetworking (GeoNet) ------------------------------------ Current Status: BoF Chairs: Melinda Shore Alexandru Petrescu Assigned Area Director: Ted Lemon Mailing list Address: its@ietf.org To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/its/current/maillist.html Additional web page: https://github.com/MelindaShore/geonet/wiki or the older http://www.lara.prd.fr/ietf-its Charter Proposal The group is concerned with Internet-wide geonetworking. IP routing and addressing are completely unaware of geography. Mechanisms and IETF protocols are needed for authorized source nodes anywhere in the Internet to disseminate packets to other nodes in areas described by geographic parameters, while respecting the privacy concerns of sender and receiver. Parameters such as geographical coordinates and other geo-locators such as civic addresses should be usable in order to specify the destination of the dissemination. The new dissemination mechanism can not be used to identify the geographical situation of computers issuing requests to resources, nor to prevent access based on such supposed identification. The initial objectives of the group are focused in particular on a common vocabulary for contexts using IP protocols and geography coordinates, on a data definition of geolocators, and on defining a bi-directional relationship - not a mechanism - between geo-spatial locators and IP locators. In general, for a complete solution, mechanisms and protocol solutions are needed for the items below: . for the accurate representation of geographic areas using coordinates such as (1) geolocators/logical coordinates, and (2) geographical/physical coordinates, and for the naming of geographic areas. . to ensure that geographical area information (for example, geolocators, names, and physical geographic coordinates) is accurately mapped to an IP address or addresses. Databases associating locations with addresses may be maintained at the source nodes, intermediate or edge nodes, and at specific IP locator nodes. . to ensure that an IP address can be accurately mapped to a geographic area information (geo-locators, names, and geographic physical coordinates). Note that this refers to the addresses of access routers, roadside units (RSUs), and so on, and not end nodes. Mapping data bases can be maintained at the source nodes, intermediate or edge nodes, and at specific IP locator nodes. . to ensure that data packets generated by source nodes placed arbitrarily in the Internet can be forwarded over multiple hops by using, where possible, geographic location representations of (1) the destination node(s) and/or (2) the intermediate nodes for the routing decisions, instead of using their IP addresses. Note that in order to solve the above challenge it is NOT mandated that all nodes located on the path from source to destination nodes are able to forward packets using the geo-coordinates of (1) the destination node(s) and/or (2) the intermediate nodes for the routing decisions. This is emphasized by using the words "where possible". The main use-cases are: o dissemination to a geographical area o goods tracking o vehicular traffic safety, efficiency, management and infotainment o mobile road-side unit o identification of originating area o geolocation of instrumented ambulance Protocol work would begin after completion of the work items listed below, and upon rechartering. Work Items ---------- o Problem Statement I-D (INFORMATIONAL) o GeoNet Terminology I-D (INFORMATIONAL) o Data Description of Geospatial Locators I-D (INFORMATIONAL) o GeoNet Framework (INFORMATIONAL) o Mapping Between IP Locators and Geospatial Locators (INFORMATIONAL) Milestones: Jul 2014 - Oct 2014 - Mar 2015 - From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Fri Feb 7 12:24:23 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 825211A0464 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 12:24:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AINANDmJdiq3 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 12:24:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pb0-x231.google.com (mail-pb0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C6F11A041E for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 12:24:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pb0-f49.google.com with SMTP id up15so3706528pbc.36 for ; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 12:24:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=RrP69UaoqPwRyVJACZQBjAyjFtQFChWcURwDgaUrJpc=; b=dwdFWA0LMXYqJNrlmG0zpAwjAx4YEsSntDkVfWHMSDFrtUQeKdBEqawzjEH/Cs2zPq OO1TGIXrrwc1HYeFLGlIaLtIymEjmUpr3X00YGtT99MEknPeTrotrTnKfyc/s2FPDAbp xYgXfxGQCqDX2YJTjugDRpAIZW16NQRQrA52Q+iAxoB/+xJsRACdufcDrAIgceU1plfo YIpoo+wY/KyqzXRJxABpLIk437fAKgyR0pEr9eMJYk5Kmja3qkWsZKojPWe7k40/XdB5 3sSRMkcT+AXmYDygMUpnnegFI8n1i4MsuY4N1bTbzZgAJH5tec0xPU+d3PLfbMcBWQj0 yhQg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.230.137 with SMTP id sy9mr21981018pbc.126.1391804661199; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 12:24:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.68.0.104 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 12:24:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52F516E5.7030305@gmail.com> References: <52F516E5.7030305@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 21:24:21 +0100 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Melinda Shore Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: its@ietf.org Subject: Re: [geonet/its] Current geonet charter X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 20:24:23 -0000 My feedback before were [1][2] and for the current charter the feedbacks are below inline, [1] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/its/current/msg00797.html [2] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/its/current/msg00371.html > Charter Proposal > > The group is concerned with Internet-wide geonetworking. > > IP routing and addressing are completely unaware of geography. > Mechanisms and IETF protocols are needed for authorized source nodes > anywhere in the Internet to disseminate packets to other nodes in > areas described by geographic parameters, while respecting the privacy > concerns of sender and receiver. Parameters such as geographical > coordinates and other geo-locators such as civic addresses should be > usable in order to specify the destination of the dissemination. > > The new dissemination mechanism can not be used to identify the > geographical situation of computers issuing requests to resources, nor > to prevent access based on such supposed identification. > > The initial objectives of the group are focused in particular on a > common vocabulary for contexts using IP protocols and geography > coordinates, on a data definition of geolocators, and on defining a > bi-directional relationship - not a mechanism - between geo-spatial > locators and IP locators. > > In general, for a complete solution, mechanisms and protocol solutions > are needed for the items below: > > . for the accurate representation of geographic areas using > coordinates such as (1) geolocators/logical coordinates, > and (2) geographical/physical coordinates, and for the > naming of geographic areas. mechanism for just representing, so it is not geonetwoking > > . to ensure that geographical area information (for example, > geolocators, names, and physical geographic coordinates) > is accurately mapped to an IP address or addresses. > Databases associating locations with addresses may be > maintained at the source nodes, intermediate or edge > nodes, and at specific IP locator nodes. mechanism for just gaurantee mapping, so it is not geonetwoking > > . to ensure that an IP address can be accurately mapped to a > geographic area information (geo-locators, names, and geographic > physical coordinates). Note that this refers to the addresses of > access routers, roadside units (RSUs), and so on, and not end nodes. > Mapping data bases can be maintained at the source nodes, > intermediate or edge nodes, and at specific IP locator nodes. > mechanism for just gaurantee mapping, so it is not geonetwoking > . to ensure that data packets generated by source nodes placed > arbitrarily in the Internet can be forwarded over multiple hops by > using, where possible, geographic location representations of (1) the > destination node(s) and/or (2) the intermediate nodes for the > routing decisions, instead of using their IP addresses. Note that > in order to solve the above challenge it is NOT mandated that all > nodes located on the path from source to destination nodes are able > to forward packets using the geo-coordinates of (1) the destination > node(s) and/or (2) the intermediate nodes for the routing > decisions. This is emphasized by using the words "where possible". no need to say to ensure, please replace it. So now this point is related to geonetwoking but not clear of the geo-nodes and their forwardings interoperable with non-geo-nodes. > > The main use-cases are: > o dissemination to a geographical area change to : dissemination to target geographical spaces/areas/vehicles > o goods tracking change to : transported goods tracking or transport context tracking > o vehicular traffic safety, efficiency, management and infotainment Why not add as the ITS use case, or smart-transport between areas? using words without saying transport may not show the real use case. I think the use cases are all about intelligent transportations (very easy to say in one line). > o mobile road-side unit > o identification of originating area > o geolocation of instrumented ambulance Why the use cases never mention the word *transport*, or *intelligent/smart* I did miss some discussions but I hope the group did not agree to delet the word transport. AB From dromasca@avaya.com Mon Feb 10 00:53:29 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3E521A07C0 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 00:53:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.148 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.148 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8vQL8vpN8ABS for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 00:53:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E94D1A07BF for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 00:53:27 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgcFAMSS+FKHCzI1/2dsb2JhbABZgmshOFe/TYEKFnSCJQEBAQEDAQEBD1wXBAIBBgINBAQBAQsdBycLFAkIAgQBEggMDodjAQyMH5E8qxEXjikjOAaDHoEUBJldhT6LMYMtgio X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,816,1384318800"; d="scan'208";a="48740140" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 10 Feb 2014 03:53:26 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC03.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.13]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 10 Feb 2014 03:40:38 -0500 Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC03.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.13]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 03:53:25 -0500 From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: Melinda Shore , "its@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [geonet/its] geonet get-together in London Thread-Index: AQHPI3q8E3u2IklRY0q7Pnv+YjPliJquM3aA Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:53:24 +0000 Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA2E3F59D4@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> References: <52F3F19A.1080100@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <52F3F19A.1080100@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.45] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [geonet/its] geonet get-together in London X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:53:29 -0000 Hi, It would be interesting to hear from Ted or other IESG or IAB members if wh= en declining the request to hold a BOF the IESG and IAB made any comments (= like items in the charter which are not focused, or considered out of the s= cope of the IETF) and recommendations for the interested community to work = on improving.=20 Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: its [mailto:its-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Melinda Shore > Sent: =E9=E5=ED=A0=E4 06 =F4=E1=F8=E5=E0=F8 2014 22:34 > To: its@ietf.org > Subject: [geonet/its] geonet get-together in London >=20 > Hi, all: >=20 > Although we will not be meeting as a scheduled BOF in London we would lik= e > to have an informal side-meeting to try to firm up the charter proposal, > clarify communication models, and settle on some agreed-upon use cases. > We're trying to choose a time that works for both key participants and fo= r > interested parties, and I've created a Doodle scheduling poll > here: http://doodle.com/e8zdg5vt3czv2rad. Please let us know your > availability, and leave comments to what would work for you if none of th= e > listed times do. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Melinda and Alex > _______________________________________________ > its mailing list > its@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its From Ted.Lemon@nominum.com Mon Feb 10 11:45:51 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 944191A0863 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 11:45:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OaazuWOMlHNv for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 11:45:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from exprod7og120.obsmtp.com (exprod7og120.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.18]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFD111A01A8 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 11:45:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob120.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUvksbbNwo7nSXq9FasFTTyGxRGBVm0Mq@postini.com; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 11:45:49 PST Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 453161B82DF for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 11:45:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37CC7190052; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 11:45:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.71.104.217] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 11:45:44 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Ted Lemon In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA2E3F59D4@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:45:41 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <52F3F19A.1080100@gmail.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA2E3F59D4@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10] Cc: Melinda Shore , "its@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [geonet/its] geonet get-together in London X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 19:45:51 -0000 On Feb 10, 2014, at 3:53 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) = wrote: > It would be interesting to hear from Ted or other IESG or IAB members = if when declining the request to hold a BOF the IESG and IAB made any = comments (like items in the charter which are not focused, or considered = out of the scope of the IETF) and recommendations for the interested = community to work on improving.=20 There was a wish for the scope of the charter to be made clearly = narrower. Some work to that end has been done, and I'm reasonably = happy with what I've seen, but I haven't done a thorough evaluation yet. There is clearly interest in this work in the IETF, based on the = previous BoF, and I don't get the impression that the IAB or IESG would = oppose adopting this work if we had the right charter. From melinda.shore@gmail.com Mon Feb 10 22:35:15 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9A061A08CC for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 22:35:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xo0msPKP891h for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 22:35:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pb0-x230.google.com (mail-pb0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DC711A04C6 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 22:35:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pb0-f48.google.com with SMTP id rr13so7272139pbb.21 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 22:35:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kcFXjVK5KEIKNlO5iR2DtGYTj4dgX1yD0Us9x00vH/4=; b=lknHYFBC38ODfSqlmJpdWnXZpfYFSiEYJqc6uTJbvZAjT1w+Hx9M9p16iqDV1NCvEi nixZsyueeUDEiKylI7zffW1OhS+CzSRYSxqIZeyzmrLvIFsEraxAoYTzGS0I5K9cXbGF ETo6pLvddGE9s/Vvf2vN3NLcb6jKp1Mk08edx9OMl4UERaZgSL/9lJuG/0WDXQFSCcqq FE6j2+m9HwtJfY5BoXf/M4nwBL3Y53rD4Ism09KiIxM95kePF5snAt1Drlda1R4D9FY4 xpjaY90zSvyQ96TpwTD8819ohKkKOJTFqOwiZZ9fGtlVlJhvlQOlZVykoF455JwY9bmM vZIw== X-Received: by 10.66.118.71 with SMTP id kk7mr30431873pab.14.1392100513825; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 22:35:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from spandex.local (216-67-29-177-rb2.sol.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [216.67.29.177]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id om6sm49163032pbc.43.2014.02.10.22.34.46 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 10 Feb 2014 22:34:56 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <52F9C477.10006@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 21:34:31 -0900 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: its@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [geonet/its] Side-meeting poll reminder X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 06:35:15 -0000 Hi: Just a reminder that we're polling interested parties to see what time works best for you for a geonet side-meeting. On the agenda is firming up the proposed charter and coming to agreement on use cases. Right now it looks like the time that works best for most respondents is Monday 3 March at 8pm. We'll need to request a room soon so we'll be closing the poll this Wednesday at 8pm AKST. We're particularly interested in hearing from people who plan to be active contributors and who can NOT make it on Monday at 8pm. Thanks, Melinda & Alex From melinda.shore@nomountain.net Thu Feb 13 08:14:54 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB7421A034A for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 08:14:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.101 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LTz_CkT2lZ63 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 08:14:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from homiemail-a103.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcbhh.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.177]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABDBD1A033B for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 08:14:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from homiemail-a103.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a103.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93F892005D10A for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 08:14:26 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=nomountain.net; h=message-id :date:from:mime-version:to:subject:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=nomountain.net; b=GlTGDDV6+ IMCr4sP3i2PYSE9QghD8GV5/lM4+rBF7+EFfjXf/QyWndJ3ysawqMJqeOtevyh0q uDgSqS+jpc4M/N8btR3pNISP/fBe/DasDW40Sp+BOk7tQBl1fNclOpls0hQ94Mc0 1euQSshOncRtko9KQ2mrA8A1dUkkMIuqvA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=nomountain.net; h= message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=nomountain.net; bh=5l/hnUFUpQT7OfY F7pZe1+ulUr4=; b=VMAjM/nrLPylr8bhc1iuiuD8+hc4wthYyvC4KMoqL09OQN3 p2oLtEXjwY7wUfYn9xu5IDnk7Pf3HJmC+u+JswUDmn6zStjZtM1/Qip798lrmmeO GRlaUO3IrEHnd23Af/fXrSZfY1iVRhu+D6VnMEJYdRpCL7Qb6omaNsVTg8OE= Received: from spandex.local (216-67-29-177-rb2.sol.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net [216.67.29.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: melinda.shore@nomountain.net) by homiemail-a103.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 406DC2005D109 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 08:14:26 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <52FCEF60.9070501@nomountain.net> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 07:14:24 -0900 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: its@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 08:19:59 -0800 Subject: [geonet/its] Poll closed/side meeting X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 16:14:55 -0000 Hi, All - We've closed the Doodle poll for a time to get-together in London. The clear winner was Monday at 8pm, with Thursday at 9pm coming in second. So, we are submitted a room request for Monday at 8, and will keep you posted on room and any changes. Melinda & Alex -- Melinda Shore No Mountain Software melinda.shore@nomountain.net "Software longa, hardware brevis." From nobody Mon Feb 17 13:45:27 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E54AE1A0410 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 13:45:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 28M5IIBL7mmn for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 13:45:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pa0-x234.google.com (mail-pa0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7F061A0408 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 13:45:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id bj1so15828879pad.11 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 13:45:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MmlEzFS73PW9mE9+trqVszeDGx/PreFcDuLA0I5l58M=; b=lf2Ym5UyW6I++gRLaXu/EAQ23v07XKrSNIrZL47k+pFGn9tsYkDqZqm65ZDDfe92zs V9awuDRGXr9FYCKg7i9q/8dYDdQkE/fTXcrl0Sd+HKf8xkIADyViWb1cB/aGkcdesNtH o/leqOrAq+iK6jOjmUvHCZSSS3yipl81/BzhrUrYf3KL8jdOSvJuuRk1RrNFptJ2zyLf 8yzSIgR6KENlPqGdpTJjfllPdlK0IZylpfLGLKLaUvJU8mer92IKK8GbNcs8umrOFeEf 4iak+dRNGOSedp8bKQ7bUOSEscDS2IGrGDuKNg9/hqYb5uQbGAQ/orUKNpdn401q09kI Kn0w== X-Received: by 10.66.159.132 with SMTP id xc4mr28588637pab.27.1392673515229; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 13:45:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from spandex.local (63-140-93-251.dynamic.dsl.acsalaska.net. [63.140.93.251]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id nm5sm48967281pbc.29.2014.02.17.13.45.11 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 17 Feb 2014 13:45:13 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <530282E5.7050509@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 12:45:09 -0900 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: its@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/6-SlkLC8RjCbE0kLlOomJIzI88s Subject: [geonet/its] Update X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:45:20 -0000 There's been a change in policy in the IESG and it is now rather difficult to get a room allocated for a side-meeting or bar BOF. So, right now the plan is to either poach an empty room or to find a quiet space in a lounge or one of the bars. We'll keep you posted. Melinda and Alex From nobody Mon Feb 17 20:17:38 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F01A01A01FE for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:17:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zwkltKcwqSpZ for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:17:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from out65-ams.mf.surf.net (out65-ams.mf.surf.net [145.0.1.65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB1E71A0379 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:17:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from EXEDGE02.ad.utwente.nl (exedge02.ad.utwente.nl [130.89.5.49]) by outgoing3-ams.mf.surf.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4) with ESMTP id s1I4I3KK031586; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 05:18:04 +0100 Received: from EXHUB02.ad.utwente.nl (130.89.4.229) by EXEDGE02.ad.utwente.nl (130.89.5.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.328.9; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 05:17:32 +0100 Received: from EXMBX23.ad.utwente.nl ([169.254.3.41]) by EXHUB02.ad.utwente.nl ([130.89.4.229]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 05:17:28 +0100 From: To: , Thread-Topic: [geonet/its] Update Thread-Index: AQHPLCmSepjhFBnNzkqEeGCRo/ajGpq6Z54SgAAAvcA= Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 04:17:28 +0000 Message-ID: References: <530282E5.7050509@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <530282E5.7050509@gmail.com> Accept-Language: nl-NL, en-US Content-Language: nl-NL X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-mimectl: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V14.2.247.1 x-originating-ip: [86.91.134.3] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F4F42111CEXMBX23adutwent_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Bayes-Prob: 0.0001 (Score 0, tokens from: utwente-out:default, base:default, @@RPTN) X-CanIt-Geo: No geolocation information available for 130.89.5.49 X-CanItPRO-Stream: utwente-out:default (inherits from utwente:default, base:default) X-Canit-Stats-ID: 0bLrEi4FD - 86b8d5eb1679 - 20140218 (trained as not-spam) X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/pfpptrs3LxU0AzRNhZ6KuvTwO-I Cc: its@ietf.org Subject: Re: [geonet/its] Update X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 04:17:37 -0000 --_000_FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F4F42111CEXMBX23adutwent_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Melinda, Hi Alex, Is it possible to have a list with agenda points that we can discuss during= the bar-BOF? Best regards, Georgios ________________________________ Van: its [its-bounces@ietf.org] namens Melinda Shore [melinda.shore@gmail.c= om] Verzonden: maandag 17 februari 2014 22:45 To: its@ietf.org Onderwerp: [geonet/its] Update There's been a change in policy in the IESG and it is now rather difficult to get a room allocated for a side-meeting or bar BOF. So, right now the plan is to either poach an empty room or to find a quiet space in a lounge or one of the bars. We'll keep you posted. Melinda and Alex _______________________________________________ its mailing list its@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its --_000_FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F4F42111CEXMBX23adutwent_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Melinda, Hi Alex,

 

Is it possible to have a list with agenda points that we can discuss dur= ing the bar-BOF?

 

Best regards,

Georgios

 

Van: its [its-bounces@ietf.org] namens Melinda Shore [melinda.sh= ore@gmail.com]
Verzonden: maandag 17 februari 2014 22:45
To: its@ietf.org
Onderwerp: [geonet/its] Update

There's been a change in policy in the IESG and it= is now
rather difficult to get a room allocated for a side-meeting
or bar BOF.  So, right now the plan is to either poach an
empty room or to find a quiet space in a lounge or one of the
bars.  We'll keep you posted.

Melinda and Alex

_______________________________________________
its mailing list
its@ietf.org
htt= ps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its
--_000_FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F4F42111CEXMBX23adutwent_-- From nobody Mon Feb 17 20:43:53 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF9761A0590 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:43:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lYisYHA1doCA for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:43:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pd0-x22c.google.com (mail-pd0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 641D11A031F for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:43:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pd0-f172.google.com with SMTP id p10so15793741pdj.3 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:43:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=DPoTqdAAfTyApAVEP8fseIBY9p5LBVpE2iTJc7qnXvI=; b=CqjBe2qG8DNyEd4qBtZI5qTvMJohwFgxvLrCgImYUqjJpmAYMrtAsUP16sTwCtlDDE pnpkyZvS+o9ADchckwc6t+HVGWXXwpowevELfDJezVpR5XhFiRViad2VLGxwHa3MlURu oDBJL3YsGHSuFw2ncN55xHUoqkDC6u8E7nUZ/lStSDd3I7WXYTWSvaWtrqJ9/fs38arZ VId8axx55gTXw83QjztEBpnx5JARRMVDes/7duf077MNhOB4BIdN1dNpl6keH9dJ6L+Y +JPrwJj1u4F7ubRvVNVH62+smAifIZPDdANlaM2skZvJ9T4bt7ovniAZ/LVP0yCCuiTh uDug== X-Received: by 10.66.156.137 with SMTP id we9mr30855072pab.30.1392698627640; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:43:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from spandex.local (63-140-93-251.dynamic.dsl.acsalaska.net. [63.140.93.251]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id g6sm132470267pat.2.2014.02.17.20.43.45 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:43:46 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <5302E4FF.5020000@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 19:43:43 -0900 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: karagian@cs.utwente.nl References: <530282E5.7050509@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/EOQ4AnuDjLtA1dJtLD9E8jc2co0 Cc: alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com, its@ietf.org Subject: Re: [geonet/its] Update X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 04:43:52 -0000 The plan is to get something sent off this week. I'm hoping that we won't need a lot of face-to-face time to make progress; I don't think we will. So, the more we can take care of prior to the meeting the better we can concentrate on the things that need discussion once we're in London. Melinda From nobody Sun Feb 23 06:51:44 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 843C11A0444 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 06:51:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.583 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.583 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_60=1.5, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, GB_I_INVITATION=-2, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gxkfQnPFMVb8 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 06:51:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD4201A00EF for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 06:51:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id s1NEpdAH003507 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 15:51:39 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 2987E202F69 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 15:52:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1.intra.cea.fr (muguet1.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.6]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17A34201589 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 15:52:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([132.166.86.14]) by muguet1.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id s1NEpbIr001969 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 15:51:38 +0100 Message-ID: <530A0AF9.3080806@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 15:51:37 +0100 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "its@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/_pLuLG8w3gvda1A9MUDsBVgO1MM Subject: [geonet/its] GeoNet BoF article in the IETF Journal X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 14:51:42 -0000 Hello, Following the geonet BoF at last IETF we received an invitation to write an article about it for the IETF Journal. The article is now published online at: http://www.internetsociety.org/publications/ietf-journal-march-2014/geonet-bof "GeoNet BoF" Alexandru Petrescu, Melinda Shore, Georgios Karagiannis, Dino Farinacci, Dimitri Papadimitriou, Alison Chaiken, Bastiaan Wissingh, Duan Shihui, Rex Buddenberg, Carl Reed, and Brian Dickson, IETF Journal, edition of March 2014. Alex From nobody Tue Feb 25 07:37:23 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B94B1A079A for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 07:37:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.283 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.283 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y-30he9-3aTG for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 07:37:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from cirse-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.142]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB29C1A079E for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 07:36:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id s1PFatDs000419 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 16:36:55 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 0069A204795 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 16:37:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1.intra.cea.fr (muguet1.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.6]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E59EA20478A for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 16:37:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (is010446-4.intra.cea.fr [10.8.33.116]) by muguet1.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id s1PFapS1004146 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 16:36:55 +0100 Message-ID: <530CB893.9060706@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 16:36:51 +0100 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "its@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/zitmH5ueUBHt1K4bt_nphSnfdJM Subject: [geonet/its] Side-meeting geonet Monday March 3rd, 20h, at IETF Registration Desk X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:37:22 -0000 Hello, Let's meet about geonet on Monday, March 3rd at 20h GMT at IETF Registration Desk Please read Charter proposal and the problem statement at https://github.com/MelindaShore/geonet/blob/master/charterproposal.txt https://github.com/MelindaShore/geonet/blob/master/problemstatement.txt Alex