Subject: [edu-team] edu tutorial spreadsheet

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 19:31:23 +0100

Hi all,

as promised, I prepared a little spreadsheet (see attached below) with
the tutorials on the left and the IETF meetings on top. I filled in
the authors where I could find out, but it wasn't possible for all
(unfortunately the IETF Sunday agenda is not always linked back to the
presentations). Maybe you have some of the missing data?

Let me know if this is useful or if you want anything else.

Mirjam
_______________________________________________
edu-team mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-team

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 11:36:47 +0100

Very useful, even without knowing all the speakers.

Might be nice to add IETF68 and the proposals for IETF69 too.

Thanks
     Brian

On 2007-02-15 19:31, Mirjam Kuehne wrote:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

---

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 13:13:00 +0100

> Very useful, even without knowing all the speakers.

great. thanks

> Might be nice to add IETF68 and the proposals for IETF69 too.

good point. I'll add the data and send it around again.
Maybe we can store this somewhere on the edu web site?

Mirjam

---

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:40:44 +0100

See attachment: I included tutorials for IETF 68
and some place holders for IETF 69.

Mirjam

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:15:49 +0100

Thanks.

My first reaction is that we should consider xml2rfc
again for 69. I'm constantly amazed by people who
don't use it and produce broken I-Ds as a result.

     Brian

---

From: Avri Doria <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:53:20 -0500

Hi,

I think that would be a great idea.  And we might even be able to get  
Elwyn to teach it, assuming they still do the IAB rotation.

BTW: i was never able to upload that one to the Edu site because it  
was too large (it is in the proceedings repository).  And I did not  
figure out how to change limits.  but in any case we had talked about  
turning it into a online class.  Is anyone interested in working on  
that?  I am not quite sure how we go about it.

a.

> don't use it and produce broken I-Ds as a result.

Ps. tanks Mirjam