Subject: [68ATTENDEES] RFC Author License Execution Opportunity

From: Ray Pelletier <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 04:01:16 -0400

All;

Yesterday Steve and Dave Crocker became the first among the RFC authors 
to execute an RFC Non-Exclusive License to the IETF Trust, the 
substantive wording of which is below.

If you are interested and willing to the same, I will be in the Dublin 
room from 1 - 3 Thursday for that purpose.

I look forward to seeing you. 

Ray

NOW THEREFORE, without limiting the effect of any prior license, 
assignment or transfer, Licensor hereby grants to Licensee, under all 
Licensor's Rights, without warranty of any kind, and Licensee accepts, a 
non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, paid-up, royalty-free 
right and license retroactive to the date of creation, including the 
right to sublicense, to reproduce, publish, modify, translate, excerpt, 
combine and create derivative works of the Documents and any portions 
thereof in any and all media, and otherwise to exploit the Documents and 
any portions thereof in any manner whatsoever.

_______________________________________________
68ATTENDEES mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/68attendees

---

From: "Arnoud van Wijk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 09:30:15 +0100

It might be a good idea to explain what this exactly means for us who have
english as second language.
Legal text is always hard to understand exactly what it exactly entails.

/Arnoud

-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Pelletier [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: donderdag 22 maart 2007 9:01
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [68ATTENDEES] RFC Author License Execution Opportunity

All;

Ray

---

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:17:51 +0100

I am the sole author, co-author, or editor of a number of RFCs and  
internet drafts listed below. In many cases, ideas were incorporated  
that did not originate with me, whose contributors are acknowledged  
in the documents. I make this statement with respect to each of them  
to the extent that I have any rights concerning them.

It is my intention to do formally what I understood at the time of  
writing that I was doing informally, which is to say that with my  
employer's knowledge and permission I contribute the product of my  
expertise or lack thereof to the Internet community without  
reservation and for the public good. This is not only my intention  
with respect to these past efforts, but (noting that I have work in  
progress at this time and expect to do such work in the future), it  
is my intention that this should apply to any future internet drafts  
that I author, co-author, or edit, and the subset of those that  
eventually become RFCs or other IETF-related documents.

My PGP Key and signature attest to the authenticity of the statement.  
If you need a wet signature, please print this email out for my  
signature, which I will execute this afternoon.

NOW THEREFORE, without limiting the effect of any prior license,  
assignment or transfer, Licensor hereby grants to Licensee, under all  
Licensor's Rights, without warranty of any kind, and Licensee  
accepts, a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, paid-up,  
royalty-free right and license retroactive to the date of creation,  
including the right to sublicense, to reproduce, publish, modify,  
translate, excerpt, combine and create derivative works of the  
Documents and any portions thereof in any and all media, and  
otherwise to exploit the Documents and any portions thereof in any  
manner whatsoever.

RFC 1220
Point-to-Point Protocol extensions for bridging. F. Baker. April 1  
1991. (Format: TXT=38165 bytes) (Obsoleted by RFC 1638) (Status:  
PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 1232
Definitions of managed objects for the DS1 Interface type. F. Baker,  
C.P. Kolb. May 1991. (Format: TXT=60757 bytes) (Obsoleted by RFC  
1406) (Updated by RFC 1239) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 1248
OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base. F. Baker, R. Coltun. July  
1991. (Format: TXT=74347 bytes) (Obsoleted by RFC 1252) (Updated by  
RFC 1349) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 1252
OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base. F. Baker, R. Coltun.  
August 1991. (Format: TXT=74471 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC 1248)  
(Obsoleted by RFC 1253) (Also RFC 1247, RFC 1245) (Status: PROPOSED  
STANDARD)

RFC 1253
OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base. F. Baker, R. Coltun.  
August 1991. (Format: TXT=74453 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC 1252)  
(Obsoleted by RFC 1850) (Also RFC 1247, RFC 1245, RFC 1246) (Status:  
PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 1315
Management Information Base for Frame Relay DTEs. C. Brown, F. Baker,  
C. Carvalho. April 1992. (Format: TXT=33825 bytes) (Obsoleted by RFC  
2115) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 1354
IP Forwarding Table MIB. F. Baker. July 1992. (Format: TXT=24905  
bytes) (Obsoleted by RFC 2096) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 1381
SNMP MIB Extension for X.25 LAPB. D. Throop, F. Baker. November 1992.  
(Format: TXT=71253 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 1389
RIP Version 2 MIB Extensions. G. Malkin, F. Baker. January 1993.  
(Format: TXT=23569 bytes) (Obsoleted by RFC 1724) (Status: PROPOSED  
STANDARD)

RFC 1406
Definitions of Managed Objects for the DS1 and E1 Interface Types. F.  
Baker, J. Watt, Eds.. January 1993. (Format: TXT=97559 bytes)  
(Obsoletes RFC 1232) (Obsoleted by RFC 2495) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 1638
PPP Bridging Control Protocol (BCP). F. Baker, R. Bowen. June 1994.  
(Format: TXT=58477 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC 1220) (Obsoleted by RFC  
2878) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 1724
RIP Version 2 MIB Extension. G. Malkin, F. Baker. November 1994.  
(Format: TXT=29645 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC 1389) (Status: DRAFT STANDARD)

RFC 1749
IEEE 802.5 Station Source Routing MIB using SMIv2. K. McCloghrie, F.  
Baker, E. Decker. December 1994. (Format: TXT=17563 bytes) (Updates  
RFC 1748) (Status: HISTORIC)

RFC 1812
Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers. F. Baker, Ed.. June 1995.  
(Format: TXT=415740 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC 1716, RFC 1009) (Updated by  
RFC 2644) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 1850
OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base. F. Baker, R. Coltun.  
November 1995. (Format: TXT=140255 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC 1253)  
(Obsoleted by RFC 4750) (Status: DRAFT STANDARD)

RFC 2082
RIP-2 MD5 Authentication. F. Baker, R. Atkinson. January 1997.  
(Format: TXT=25436 bytes) (Obsoleted by RFC 4822) (Status: PROPOSED  
STANDARD)

RFC 2096
IP Forwarding Table MIB. F. Baker. January 1997. (Format: TXT=35930  
bytes) (Obsoletes RFC 1354) (Obsoleted by RFC 4292) (Status: PROPOSED  
STANDARD)

RFC 2115
Management Information Base for Frame Relay DTEs Using SMIv2. C.  
Brown, F. Baker. September 1997. (Format: TXT=59950 bytes) (Obsoletes  
RFC 1315) (Status: DRAFT STANDARD)

RFC 2206
RSVP Management Information Base using SMIv2. F. Baker, J. Krawczyk,  
A. Sastry. September 1997. (Format: TXT=112937 bytes) (Status:  
PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 2208
Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1 Applicability  
Statement Some Guidelines on Deployment. A. Mankin, Ed., F. Baker, B.  
Braden, S. Bradner, M. O`Dell, A. Romanow, A. Weinrib, L. Zhang.  
September 1997. (Format: TXT=14289 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

RFC 2213
Integrated Services Management Information Base using SMIv2. F.  
Baker, J. Krawczyk, A. Sastry. September 1997. (Format: TXT=36147  
bytes) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 2214
Integrated Services Management Information Base Guaranteed Service  
Extensions using SMIv2. F. Baker, J. Krawczyk, A. Sastry. September  
1997. (Format: TXT=15971 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 2382
A Framework for Integrated Services and RSVP over ATM. E. Crawley,  
Ed., L. Berger, S. Berson, F. Baker, M. Borden, J. Krawczyk. August  
1998. (Format: TXT=73865 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

RFC 2474
Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS Field) in the  
IPv4 and IPv6 Headers. K. Nichols, S. Blake, F. Baker, D. Black.  
December 1998. (Format: TXT=50576 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC 1455, RFC  
1349) (Updated by RFC 3168, RFC 3260) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 2597
Assured Forwarding PHB Group. J. Heinanen, F. Baker, W. Weiss, J.  
Wroclawski. June 1999. (Format: TXT=24068 bytes) (Updated by RFC  
3260) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 2747
RSVP Cryptographic Authentication. F. Baker, B. Lindell, M. Talwar.  
January 2000. (Format: TXT=49477 bytes) (Updated by RFC 3097)  
(Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 2804
IETF Policy on Wiretapping. IAB, IESG. May 2000. (Format: TXT=18934  
bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

RFC 2814
SBM (Subnet Bandwidth Manager): A Protocol for RSVP-based Admission  
Control over IEEE 802-style networks. R. Yavatkar, D. Hoffman, Y.  
Bernet, F. Baker, M. Speer. May 2000. (Format: TXT=141886 bytes)  
(Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 2860
Memorandum of Understanding Concerning the Technical Work of the  
Internet Assigned Numbers Authority. B. Carpenter, F. Baker, M.  
Roberts. June 2000. (Format: TXT=12361 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

RFC 2998
A Framework for Integrated Services Operation over Diffserv Networks.  
Y. Bernet, P. Ford, R. Yavatkar, F. Baker, L. Zhang, M. Speer, R.  
Braden, B. Davie, J. Wroclawski, E. Felstaine. November 2000.  
(Format: TXT=76378 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

RFC 3175
Aggregation of RSVP for IPv4 and IPv6 Reservations. F. Baker, C.  
Iturralde, F. Le Faucheur, B. Davie. September 2001. (Format:  
TXT=88681 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 3289
Management Information Base for the Differentiated Services  
Architecture. F. Baker, K. Chan, A. Smith. May 2002. (Format:  
TXT=239041 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 3518
Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) Bridging Control Protocol (BCP). M.  
Higashiyama, F. Baker, T. Liao. April 2003. (Format: TXT=82102 bytes)  
(Obsoletes RFC 2878) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)

RFC 3704
Ingress Filtering for Multihomed Networks. F. Baker, P. Savola. March  
2004. (Format: TXT=35942 bytes) (Updates RFC 2827) (Also BCP0084)  
(Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)

RFC 3716
The IETF in the Large: Administration and Execution. IAB Advisory  
Committee. March 2004. (Format: TXT=91326 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

RFC 3924
Cisco Architecture for Lawful Intercept in IP Networks. F. Baker, B.  
Foster, C. Sharp. October 2004. (Format: TXT=40826 bytes) (Status:  
INFORMATIONAL)

RFC 4053
Procedures for Handling Liaison Statements to and from the IETF. S.  
Trowbridge, S. Bradner, F. Baker. April 2005. (Format: TXT=38816  
bytes) (Also BCP0103) (Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)

RFC 4192
Procedures for Renumbering an IPv6 Network without a Flag Day. F.  
Baker, E. Lear, R. Droms. September 2005. (Format: TXT=52110 bytes)  
(Updates RFC 2072) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

RFC 4542
Implementing an Emergency Telecommunications Service (ETS) for Real- 
Time Services in the Internet Protocol Suite. F. Baker, J. Polk. May  
2006. (Format: TXT=99770 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

RFC 4594
Configuration Guidelines for DiffServ Service Classes. J. Babiarz, K.  
Chan, F. Baker. August 2006. (Format: TXT=144044 bytes) (Status:  
INFORMATIONAL)

RFC 4750
OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base. D. Joyal, Ed., P.  
Galecki, Ed., S. Giacalone, Ed., R. Coltun, F. Baker. December 2006.  
(Format: TXT=222459 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC 1850) (Status: PROPOSED  
STANDARD)

"Extensions to OSPF to Support Mobile Ad Hoc Networking", Abhay Roy,  
M Chandra, 22-Jan-07, draft-chandra-ospf-manet-ext-04.txt

"Multihomed IPv6 prefix delegation, aggregation, and distribution",  
Fred Baker, Marla Azinger, 16-Oct-06, draft-baker-v6ops-l3- 
multihoming-analysis-00.txt

"QoS Signaling in a Nested Virtual Private Network", Fred Baker,  
Pratik Bose, 6-Feb-07, draft-ietf-tsvwg-vpn-signaled-preemption-02.txt

"Aggregation of DiffServ Service Classes", Kwok Ho Chan, 8-Mar-07,  
draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-class-aggr-02.txt

"An EF DSCP for Capacity-Admitted Traffic", Fred Baker, 15-Dec-06,  
draft-ietf-tsvwg-admitted-realtime-dscp-00.txt

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:28:28 +0100

I believe that in that situation, you do need to check with
someone independent. This is quite subtle and not being a lawyer,
I certainly wouldn't attempt to explain it in my own
words.

Also, the reason I personally am not signing this week is because
I need to check on the implications with respect to the rights I have
automatically given away to my previous and current employers.

    Brian

---

From: Shane Kerr <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:47:02 +0100

Brian,

> I certainly wouldn't attempt to explain it in my own

I think it is actually a shame that the statement is so hard to read. It is a
myth that legal language needs to be hard to read. See the following for some
thoughts by a real live legal person about this:

http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/law.htm

It *is* more efficient for lawyers to talk to each other in legalese, because
the jargon does contain specific meanings that are expressed with more precision
and conciseness than non-jargon text. But as in all writing, the authors should
consider the audience.

It would be nice if we could just say:

"I grant the IETF the right to use these documents for any purpose they want.
This does not affect rights I have given to anyone else. Please don't sue me."

Because honestly that's pretty much what the text says.

Google for "legal plain english" for lots of good stuff in this area.

Finally, I am *very* aware of the irony of someone at the IETF complaining about
obscure, hard-to-read text from another profession.

- --
Shane

---

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 11:02:45 +0100

On Mar 22, 2007, at 9:30 AM, Arnoud van Wijk wrote:

> It might be a good idea to explain what this exactly means for us  
> who have english as second language. Legal text is always hard to  
> understand exactly what it exactly entails.

> assignment or transfer, Licensor hereby grants to Licensee, under  
> all  Licensor's Rights, without warranty of any kind, and Licensee  
> accepts, a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, paid- 
> up, royalty-free right and license retroactive to the date of  
> creation, including the right to sublicense, to reproduce, publish,  
> modify, translate, excerpt, combine and create derivative works of  
> the Documents and any portions thereof in any and all media, and  

For the record, I don't think lawyer's speak English as a first  
language either; they speak legalese as a first language. Hence,  
legal language is difficult to understand also for those of us for  
which English is our native language.

I am not a lawyer. As I understand it, western law, or at least  
British Common Law and systems like the American one that derive from  
it, is based on the principle that the law should support what a  
reasonable man would understand and consider "right". Being what some  
would consider a reasonable man, I have interpreted the legalese into  
my own words and restated it. From my perspective, the words from the  
PGP-signed email I recently sent to this list (below) have the same  
meaning and intention as the legalese above.

> internet drafts listed below. In many cases, ideas were  
> incorporated that did not originate with me, whose contributors are  
> acknowledged in the documents. I make this statement with respect  
> to each of them to the extent that I have any rights concerning them.
>
> is my intention that this should apply to any future internet  
> drafts that I author, co-author, or edit, and the subset of those  
> that eventually become RFCs or other IETF-related documents.

That said, let me give you a dictionary definition of the words in  
the above and the meaning that I derive.

> NOW THEREFORE,

this statement is made in the context of other statements made  
before, such as my words above.

> without limiting the effect of any prior license,

If some other license has also been given, it is still in force.

> assignment

The work may have been assigned to another party; the rights to  
patents filed by corporate employees are often assigned to their  
companies for example. If such an assignment has occurred in the  
past, it remains in force.

> or transfer,

It may also have been given away in some other way I suppose. If so,  
that is still in force.

> Licensor

That's me.

> hereby grants to

To the extent that I have the right and ability, I give to...

> Licensee,

The Internet community as embodied organizationally in the IETF and  
legally in the IETF Trust

> under all Licensor's Rights,

"all" is a pretty inclusive term. "rights" are that which gives me a  
reason to initiate a dispute.

> without warranty of any kind,

It is what it is. If it's broken, I'm not going to fix it or make  
reparations of any kind.

> and Licensee accepts,

The IETF Trust and the participants in the IETF that it represents agree

> a non-exclusive,

I can make a similar statement to someone else as well with regard to  
my own interest in the works in question.

> perpetual,

continuing or enduring forever

> irrevocable,

not to be revoked or recalled; unable to be repealed or annulled;  
unalterable

> worldwide,

extending or spread throughout the world.

> paid-up,

I'm not going to ask for a lump sum payment

> royalty-free

I'm not going to ask for incremental payments

> right

a just claim or title, whether legal, prescriptive, or moral

> and license

"formal permission from a governmental or other constituted authority  
to do something, as to carry on some business or profession"

In this case, it is my rights that are in question here, so I am the  
relevant authority with respect to them.

> retroactive to the date of creation,

I'm not going to dispute past actions, whatever they may or may not  
have been

> including the right to sublicense,

The IETF Trust and the community it legally embodies my give similar  
license to others

> to reproduce,

make copies of in any form

> publish,

post on the web, in FTP, paper documents, CDs, and so on

> modify,

RFCs are often updated and reposted in the form of new RFCs. You will  
note that this has happened to a number of documents I wrote 15 years  
ago.

> translate,

render faithfully in another language.

> excerpt,

quote from

> combine and create derivative works of the Documents

munge together in various ways. For example, I am not an "author" of  
the OSPF specifications, but I am acknowledged as a contributor. In  
many cases, I contributed an idea in a separate internet draft of  
which I *was* the author, text from which or ideas from which were  
later incorporated in base specifications. That's explicitly OK.

> and any portions thereof

The same is true for partial documents.

> in any and all media,

I really don't care how the information is carried around. Paper  
punched tape in capsules tied to pigeon's legs is fine with me if  
someone wants to do it.

> and otherwise to exploit

If a statement from this is useful for some other purpose, perhaps  
educational for example, go for it

> the Documents and any portions thereof

yup, those documents

> in any manner whatsoever.

just do it.

---

From: Marc Blanchet <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 14:24:46 +0100

leaving the hilton at 7h15am tomorrow friday and taking a cab to the  
airport. If you are leaving at the same time, we can share the cab  
drive. please contact me offline.

Marc.

Le 07-03-22 à 09:01, Ray Pelletier a écrit :

> All;
>
> Yesterday Steve and Dave Crocker became the first among the RFC  
> authors to execute an RFC Non-Exclusive License to the IETF Trust,  
> the substantive wording of which is below.
>
> If you are interested and willing to the same, I will be in the  
> Dublin room from 1 - 3 Thursday for that purpose.
>

-----
IPv6 book: Migrating to IPv6, Wiley, 2006, http://www.ipv6book.ca

---

From: Scott W Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 09:29:58 -0400

My flight is Saturday at 9:55am.  I haven't decided on taxi time yet.
 Let me know if you want to share.

---

From: "GOLDMAN, STUART O \(STUART\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 08:36:22 -0500

My flight is also Saturday but at 8:45 AM so you may not want to go that
early.

I have not yet asked the front desk how much time to allow.

I would be happy to split a taxi, and it is nice to have company.

Stuart Goldman
Alcatel-Lucent 
[email-masked]
602 493 8438

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:47:38 +0200 (EET)

> automatically given away to my previous and current employers.

Brian, I believe this is a good point but unfortunately it hasn't been 
emphasized enough.

I think we get a surge of authors wanting to give these rights, but don't 
necessarily realize that they may not even have those rights in the first 
place.

If so, this could clutter the IETF trust with license assignments which 
may or may not be valid (and almost impossible to find out which are 
which), the employers of RFC writers still holding some rights to the 
work.

>> From: Ray Pelletier [mailto:[email-masked]] Sent: donderdag 22 maart 
>> 2007 9:01
>> To: [email-masked]
>> Yesterday Steve and Dave Crocker became the first among the RFC authors to 
>> execute an RFC Non-Exclusive License to the IETF Trust, the substantive 
>> wording of which is below.
>> 
>> If you are interested and willing to the same, I will be in the Dublin room 
>> from 1 - 3 Thursday for that purpose.
>> 
>> NOW THEREFORE, without limiting the effect of any prior license, assignment 
>> or transfer, Licensor hereby grants to Licensee, under all Licensor's 
>> Rights, without warranty of any kind, and Licensee accepts, a 
>> right and license retroactive to the date of creation, including the right 
>> to sublicense, to reproduce, publish, modify, translate, excerpt, combine 
>> and create derivative works of the Documents and any portions thereof in 
>> any and all media, and otherwise to exploit the Documents and any portions 
>> thereof in any manner whatsoever.
>>

---

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:02:04 +0100

I have executed the license agreement.

As far as I can tell, it doesn't affect anything about my employers' rights 
in the documents (if any), one way or another.
So I feel confident that I can sign it.

                 Harald

--On 22. mars 2007 15:47 +0200 Pekka Savola <[email-masked]> wrote:

>>> It might be a good idea to explain what this exactly means for us who
>>> have english as second language.
>>> From: Ray Pelletier [mailto:[email-masked]] Sent: donderdag 22
>>> maart  2007 9:01
>>> To: [email-masked]
>>> Licensor's  Rights, without warranty of any kind, and Licensee accepts,
>>> a  non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, paid-up,
>>> Documents and any portions thereof in  any and all media, and otherwise
>>> to exploit the Documents and any portions  thereof in any manner
>>> whatsoever.
>>>

---

From: Tony Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:20:49 -0400

Anyone interested in sharing a ride at around 4:30 - 4:45? My flight is
Saturday at 7:00 am.

What follows is info on getting there via cab and back via bus+metro
last week.

My wife did the same flight last Saturday. The concierge told us that we
should be at the airport about 2 hours early, meaning leaving the hotel
at about 4:30. (Fortunately, the taxis are waiting outside 24 hours a
day, so there's no problem getting   a ride.) The ride went quickly and
we got there at about 4:50.

The taxi driver would only take cash, even though I was not checking out
and had been told by the concierge that it could be charged to my room. Hah.

Inside terminal 2, there's a board that tells you which agent booths to
go to for various different flights. (At first, it had the wrong booth
number down for her flight, but that was eventually corrected.) The KLM
agents weren't even there yet, and didn't arrive for another 20 minutes.
So we were able to get her checked in rather quickly. It also means I
don't plan on leaving the hotel quite as early as we did last Saturday. :-)

Unlike KLM, the Lufthansa agent booths were in full swing when we
arrived, with *LONG* lines already. So if you have the 6:5* flight to
Frankfurt via Lufthansa, you might want to get there a bit early.

Coming back I took the bus and the metro. It took about ~45 minutes and
was *very* easy. However, the transfers between lines or between the
metro and the bus would *not* be easy with lots of luggage. With one
bag, it might be okay, and there shouldn't gangs of hoodlums around to
hassle you at that time of the morning. Get *two* 20 Kcz tickets (one
for you and one for your bags, and the day/week passes are not good
enough), hop on either the red or yellow lines at the Florenc station
and go two stops to Mustek (yellow) or Museum (red). Switch to the green
line towards Dejvicka and go all the way there. Find the bus stop across
the street and get on a #119. (It'll be the first stop for #119, so
there should be plenty of room.) Stay on the #119 until its last stop at
the airport.

	Tony Hansen
	[email-masked]

---

From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 07:18:05 -0700

My flight is 12:40 PM *Sunday*.  If anyone would like to share a cab, 
please let me know.  I'm not sure what time one should leave for the 
airport.
-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly-selected tag: ---------------
Do not condemn the judgement of another because it differs from your
own.  You may both be wrong.                              --Dandemis

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 07:36:42 -0700 (PDT)

> please let me know.  I'm not sure what time one should leave for the 

Front desk is recommending 6:30am for an 8:45am departure Saturday, so 
plan to leave the hotel at least two hours ahead of your flight.

---

From: "Nitin Bahadur" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 07:45:46 -0700

I have a flight at 10am on Sat. I am at the Intercontinental (not the
Hilton). Any takers?

Please unicast replies.

Nitin

---

From: "Silverton Aron-C1710C" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 11:54:12 -0400

----Original Message----
From: Tony Hansen [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 9:21 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [68ATTENDEES] sharing cab drive to airport: Saturday am

> 
> The taxi driver would only take cash, even though I was not checking
> out and had been told by the concierge that it could be charged to my
> room. Hah. 
> 
> 
> 	Tony Hansen
> 	[email-masked]
> 

I was told that you need to get a voucher from the front desk if you
want the taxi charged to your room either while in residence at the
hotel or after you check out and head to the airport.

Aron