draft-krebs-gnuqueue-protocol-02.txt
Interesting -- http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-krebs-gnuqueue-protocol-02.txt Copyright Statement This document is Copyright (C) W. G. Krebs (2000). All Rights Reserved. However, distribution of this memo in its original form is unlimited Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) W. G. Krebs (2000). All Rights Reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English. [... standard BCP-9 blah blah blahs...] -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org -- Fuehrerschein, n --- A permit to drive the Fuehrer
Re: I am a strong believer in the democratic process.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, I still have difficulties to understand the merit of having .ip6.int or .ip6.arpa or even .mickey-mouse for holding the reverse records. That must be a 100 % political decision with no merit at all. Well... we *DO* need to agree on what the root of the reverse tree will be - otherwise it's hard to write tools that do reverse lookups. ;) Fine, I have no problem with that statement. The politics starts when you realize that somebody owns the spot that you're parking the tree. Using .mickey-mouse is bad - there's *enough* Bad Karma attached to the whole TLD issue via ICANN and the like. Sure, I also understand that there are many intercoursing manureholes around there (is this term polite enough :-) ? Using .ip6.int or .ip6.arpa requires that the manager(s) of .int or .arpa agree/consent/support that usage (which they may not, for a number of reasons). Looking at the SOA/NS entries for .INT and .ARPA is rather revealing. I'm pretty sure that the current set of NS entries for .INT is sufficient to support reverse lookups under the current level of IP6 deployment, but will require some major upgrading in the future. ;) Therefore, I believe that meritocracy is fine at a WG level. Unfortunately, it is not at the upper level like IESG and IAB. Worse, requiring an ICANN BoD candidate be highly technical skilled sounds like requiring Lou Gestner (IBM, an ex cookie manager, http://www.ibm.com/lvg/ ) to understand the inner beauty of an IBM 360/91 pipeline processor. Last, perhaps long time IETF participants (or whatever the political term is), should take a sabbatical term: life is not just reading emails (especially on weekends)! Visiting South Africa is a good idea, to study on how a minority gave up its long time domination. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Get there in time:mirror on the wall-Genesis:tail -f trick
Re: Mailing list policy
Hello: Well, it was yet another burst of suggestions. But, what was the problem? And, whose problem? Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote: When you are the maintainer of a list That assumes that someone is the maintainer of the IETF mailing list. At this moment, that is not the case. You are asking that an additional task be put on one of the IETF Secretariat folks. That's a reasonable request (and one that I would second), but it is not based in current reality. Well, then it is about time that a system/ organization with an annual turnaround of millions of dollars has (a) mailing list maintainer(s). But, to whom do the IETFS folks reporting anyway? To the IESG? CNRI? IAB? ISOC? Or, directly to the goddess of confusion herself? Robert Elz wrote: A supposed technological fix to a non-technological problem that just made things worse, not better. Why? I agree with what ned.freed wrote: In general, I agree with this assessment. But that doesn't mean that some point fixes don't help in some cases. -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Tarlumobi di hamu Raja ni Hula-Hula dohot Tulang nami,bah!
Re: contents July COOK Report on Ethernet in the first mile
On Mon, 14 May 2001, Harald Alvestrand - IETF Chair wrote: I believe this advertising is inappropriate on the IETF list. Please stop. At 20:25 12.05.2001 -0400, Gordon Cook wrote: The COOK Report on Internet July 2001 (Vol. 10, No. 4) [...] Why? - Too late: after more than 10 years, why stop it now? - That message, was passed through [EMAIL PROTECTED] Therefore, it is kosher :^). - Last, how different is that message compared with the monthly ietf_censored posting? from me to you (da da da da da dam dam da :-), -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - If ain't broke, ain't fix IT;but I'm broke, so IMFix IT!
Re: advertising on official IETF mailing lists
Hello: First of all, thank you for reply. And by the way, you do not need to send me an extra copy of your email (since I am on the IETF list). Second, I get more annoyed when receive: - extra copies of a same email - I am out of office messages (guess: how many will I receive soon...). - be rich in 7 days adv. - Goldstein's tonner supply adv; compared to a single predictable (filterable) monthly report posting. Third, but it should not be considered as supporting that monthly report post. I was questioning the reason for stopping it. On Tue, 15 May 2001, RJ Atkinson wrote: - That message, was passed through [EMAIL PROTECTED] Therefore, it is kosher :^). Nope. IETF Censored isn't an IETF list, though an IETF list is filtered (by someone other than an IETF officer) into that list. So, why had that IETF officer not censored it until recently? - Last, how different is that message compared with the monthly ietf_censored posting? IETF censored is not an IETF official mailing list. IETF Censored is a private mailing list operated out of Italy. Yes, but it is allowed to do a montly posting to the IETF list? Forth, we can work it out... we can work out... Life is very short, and there is no time for fussing and fighting my friend... best regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - If ain't broke, ain't fix IT;but I'm broke, so IMFix IT!
Re: Carrier Class Gateway
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Peter Deutsch wrote: Errr, actually carriers don't have 16 guns, the battleships did. There Arizona had (has?) 14 ones. At least, when I visited Pearl Harbor a couple of years ago Anyway, will this proposed protocol also apply to STD carries over V* cannal ? :-) regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - If ain't broke, ain't fix IT;but I'm broke, so IMFix IT!
Re: How to parse an AXFR response packet
Hello: I have checked the POISSON charter: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/poisson-charter.html which has no goal at all. Therefore, I can predict that this thread will go to /dev/null, with or without using .procmail. Also, this vendetta can be traced back to 1992: http://ittf.vlsm.org/ietf/16.txt Lloyd Wood wrote: This seems to be a clear example of emergent mailing list behaviour I worried about in recent discussion on Poisson (hence the cc.). RFC-2418 is a product of the POISSON group. Do you believe that the WG should revise it? If yes, which part? Here, XYZZY holds the conflicting roles of chair, A hollow sound plugh... :-) DISCLAIMER: I believe that DJB's tough DNS implementation sucks, but that is not the point! regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - If ain't broke, ain't fix IT;but I'm broke, so IMFix IT!
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-wildgrube-gnp-01.txt
John C Klensin wrote: What should I do if I could not find a internet draft that was announced as an I-D action in IETF-Announce? Or try www.ietf.org directly, being sure that you are not going through any interception proxies or other intermediate caches. OK, I have got the idea. But, what if somehow an I-D does not exist in that IETF repository? What I have in mind is: procedure log login to several sites in different countries (US, Germany, etc.); carefully log everything (e.g. date, 404 messages, etc). until "found" do begin wait 24 hours; repeat procedure log; end. right? -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - If ain't broke, ain't fix IT;but I'm broke, so IMFix IT!
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-wildgrube-gnp-01.txt
Lloyd Wood wrote: That was the odd one out, but I'm getting 404 Not found for other recently-announced drafts. Perhaps uploading before announcing would be good. Simple Question: What should I do if I could not find a internet draft that was announced as an I-D action in IETF-Announce? (See also: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ietf-i-d_action/messages/ ) Proposed Answer: - Do nothing; this is a fixable known problem. - Notify the IETF webmaster(s?); with a risk that they will not admit this bug. - Notify the IESG. - Complain through the IETF list. - Complain to the IAB, cc to ICANN, Nanog, ISOC, RFC- Editor. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - If ain't broke, ain't fix IT;but I'm broke, so IMFix IT!
Re: IESG Response to Copyright appeal
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem is that when you take *that* stuff into account, I've spent (or have committed to spending) *more* time trying to comply with the GPL than I have actually making useful things available. OK, I am convinced that GPL creates problems, especially for the maintainers. Now, back to the original issue that I have raised, i.e. IESG's assertions on: Doing so, according to our counsel '...is as close to a "contribution to the public" that we can get'. Is that really true that the BCP-9 text was developed by the IETF (not ISOC!) lawyers specifically to deal with IETF documents? Furthermore, (AFAIK) haven't these counsels also recommended that "Foo of Conduct" modification? I just put the GDL as a comparison. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- The Kappa likes getting cucumber --- Budum... Budum...
Re: IESG Response to Copyright appeal
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ietf-announce/message/167 In doing this, you leave the ISOC copyright there, which asserts that the ISOC has your permission to publish the document in the RFC archive, and protects it from unauthorized modifications or claims. Doing so, according to our counsel '...is as close to a "contribution to the public" that we can get'. Dear honest lawyers, counsels, et. al.: May I know, how close to a "contribution to the public"; the GNU Free Documentation License is? See also http://gnux.vlsm.org/copyleft/fdl.txt regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- The Kappa likes getting cucumber --- Budum... Budum...
Re: IESG Response to Copyright appeal
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: May I know, how close to a "contribution to the public"; the GNU Free Documentation License is? See also http://gnux.vlsm.org/copyleft/fdl.txt Not very. From the preamble: "The purpose of this License is to make a manual, textbook, or other written document "free" in the sense of freedom: to assure everyone the effective freedom to copy and redistribute it, with or without modifying it, either commercially or noncommercially. Secondarily, this License preserves for the author and publisher a way to get credit for their work, while not being considered responsible for modifications made by others." I have no problem with that. However; since I am not a lawyer, I am just wondering if there are hidden catches that I am not aware of. At least it's not as viral as the GPL, and they don't require you (in section 3) to *personally* distribute sources for 3 years if you ship binaries of GPL programs (which irked me no end when building installable packages for AIX - even though I made *no* source changes, I asked (and was told) that just pointing at ftp.gnu.org for the source wasn't acceptable). You only need take "prudent steps" for one year to ensure the place you point people stays there. Section 3 of GPL http://gnux.vlsm.org/copyleft/gpl.txt has three options, "a" (accompany with source code) , "b" (three years commitment to distribute), and "c" (providing pointers). So, what is the problem to choose one of them? regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- The Kappa likes getting cucumber --- Budum... Budum...
Re: Fwd: Indianz.com NEWS BRIEFS: APRIL 1, 2001
Not having seen an RFC come over the transom yesterday or today, here is an alternative. http://216.218.205.86/april1.asp Are you sure? 1 April Special * RFC 3091 on Pi Digit Generation Protocol * RFC 3092 on Etymology of "Foo" * RFC 3093 on Firewall Enhancement Protocol --- * RFC 3091 on Pi Digit Generation Protocol http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3091.html This protocol is intended to provide the Pi digit generation service (PIgen), and be used between clients and servers on host computers. Typically the clients are on workstation hosts lacking local Pi support, and the servers are more capable machines with greater Pi calculation capabilities. The essential tradeoff is the use of network resources and time instead of local computational cycles. * RFC 3092 on Etymology of "Foo" http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3092.html Approximately 212 RFCs so far, starting with RFC 269, contain the terms `foo', `bar', or `foobar' as metasyntactic variables without any proper explanation or definition. This document rectifies that deficiency. * RFC 3093 on Firewall Enhancement Protocol http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3093.html Internet Transparency via the end-to-end architecture of the Internet has allowed vast innovation of new technologies and services [1]. However, recent developments in Firewall technology have altered this model and have been shown to inhibit innovation. We propose the Firewall Enhancement Protocol (FEP) to allow innovation, without violating the security model of a Firewall. With no cooperation from a firewall operator, the FEP allows ANY application to traverse a Firewall. Our methodology is to layer any application layer Transmission Control Protocol/User Datagram Protocol (TCP/UDP) packets over the HyperText Transfer Protocol (HTTP) protocol, since HTTP packets are typically able to transit Firewalls. This scheme does not violate the actual security usefulness of a Firewall, since Firewalls are designed to thwart attacks from the outside and to ignore threats from within. The use of FEP is compatible with the current Firewall security model because it requires cooperation from a host inside the Firewall. FEP allows the best of both worlds: the security of a firewall, and transparent tunneling thought the firewall. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- The Kappa likes getting cucumber --- Budum... Budum...
Re: Personal notes from the Minneapolis meeting
Jacob Palme wrote: My personal notes from the IETF meeting in Minneapolis last week can be found at http://dsv.su.se/jpalme/ietf/ietf-mar-01-notes.html Here are some highlights (since some of the nroff systems are not "html ready" :^) -- Content Distribution: One speaker complained bitterly: There are several patents, suing each other, and making work complex for IETF standards work. The patent system is screwed up. People unreasonably get patents for well-known ideas and methods. Lawyers have unreasonable concepts of what is novel and patentable, causing much problems and stopping technical development and standards work. (notes from Professor Jacob Palme, Stockholm University and KTH Technical University http://dsv.su.se/jpalme/ietf/ietf-mar-01-notes.html per March 2001)
Re: Establishment of Temporary Sub-IP Area
Fred Baker wrote: There has been some concern over the scope of the IETF sub-IP effort. This is an attempt to help clarify the view of the IESG on a number of issues. Suggestion: I believe that this (type of) message should be copied to the ietf-announce list. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Blowfish, n (coup d'poisson) --- a secure blow job -
Re: rfc publication suggestions
Vernon Schryver wrote: For "nroff guides" on your own systems, try `man -k roff` and `man -k mdoc`. Script started on Fri Mar 16 17:37:39 2001 % hostname rmsbase.vlsm.org % /sbin/kernelversion 2.2 % man -k roff roff: nothing appropriate % man -f mdoc mdoc: nothing appropriate % exit exit Script done on Fri Mar 16 17:38:18 2001 http://www.google.com/search?hl=enlr=safe=offq=nroff+macros finds 23,900 pages. This is exactly the problem: I could not find any Leslie-Lamport-quality-HOWTO-document for nroff. Who is still using this dino technology anyway? Most RFC authors use that "dino technology," First of all, I define "dino technology" as something where the average age of its producers (not just users) constantly increases. Jon Crowcroft wrote: (rhetorical question, dont answer that:-) Well, an eye for an eye, a rhetorical question for a rhetorical one :-). I am just wondering what you are going to do with your private video tapes. Keep them as is, or transfer them to VCDs, or transfer them to DVDs? Same question for QIC-150s, Reel tapes, etc. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Blowfish, n (coup d'poisson) --- a secure blow job -
Re: Easy Money!!!!
On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can earn $50,000 or more in the next 90 days sending e-mail. Seem Impossible? Ah, great! I could pay the IETF meeting, plus first class air ticket, plus other accomodation. And sure, I will use the rest of the money for bleaching my skin like Michael Jackson. Oh yes, I will attend an nroff course. :-) regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Oops, I did it again... I am not that innocent... [Spears]
Re: DNSng: where to discuss/get info?
Mohsen BANAN-Public wrote: Did you follow the discussions that I initiated on a similar set of topics on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing lists about two years ago? Nope, but what was the conclusion? Where (URL) is it archived? Basically, my question was because of IAB's assertion in RFC-2826 "IAB Technical Comment on the Unique DNS Root" ( http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2826.html ) Bob Allisat [EMAIL PROTECTED] followed up on that idea... I am not aware that he is interested in the technical aspect of DNS. I am also interested in the answer to your question. Rahmat - is there any WG, or organization, or list, or whatever Rahmat which is actively discussing the TECHNICAL (not political) Rahmat aspect of how a new DNS scheme should be? Perhaps, we should discuss this in private. What I have in mind is somewhat of an "address book" that is publicly accessible, perhaps through an ordinary DNS. Since it is publicly accessible, it can be shared/adopted by others. But, still there will be a legal issue here. Since XYZZY lawyers believe that they are entitled to XYZZY.com, XYZZY.net, XYZZY.org, XYZZY.any.other.TLD, do they have right over the XYZZY definition in my private address book? regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Jangan,jangan,samakan;VLSM-TJT dengan yang lain! A.Rafiq
HTML vs. TXT: let's compare!
Hello, let's compare: http://dmoz.org/Bookmarks/G/gaelle/RFC/Routing_and_Addressing/BGP/ and http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-chen-bgp-reference-01.txt Some fellow perhaps prefers the first one and some others may prefers the second one. Some may take aspirin, and some may eat chicken soup. Why not have both? regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Don't cry for me, Nusantara;the truth is that I never...
Re: Writing Internet Drafts on a Macintosh
Also, why isn't HTML an accepted format for Internet Drafts just a sec. traditionally, we have this discussion every six months. it has not been six months yet. And the poisson is due to start its five year cycle to discuss about the future format of an RFC. The last consensus (1996) was "let's wait five years :-). regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Don't cry for me, Nusantara;the truth is that I never...
DNSng: where to discuss/get info?
Hello: Well, the current DNS was designed around 1983 by Mockapetris et. al. ( See also http://gnIETF.vlsm.org/127.txt ). AFAIK, it was based on assumptions like a "single root"/ "single person authority", a simple categorizing scheme (.edu, .gov, ...), etc. Unfortunately, nowadays, XYZZY lawyers believe that XYZZY is entitled to XYZZY.net, XYZZY.com, XYZZY.org, XYZZY.ALL-TLDs, etc. So the questions are: - why not design a new DNS scheme? - is there any WG, or organization, or list, or whatever which is actively discussing the TECHNICAL (not political) aspect of how a new DNS scheme should be? - for example, what is the technical problem if everyone is running hir own "address book"; so that "my-favorite-soda" or "soda" will be mapped to whatever favorite soda (Dr. Pepper for myself :-). - or, what is the technical problem, if creating about 40++ "alternate" TLDs like: "0", "1", ... "A", "B", "C", ... "Z", ".", .... Example: the classical ".com" will be mapped to TLD "m", etc. - is NameDroppers the answer? regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Mr.LOPA-LOPA... HAMtastic,MENKEHstic,YUSRILbis...|Shaggy
Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1)
General Question: - How to migrate? I have been using the "QWERTY" keyboard all the time. I am aware that it is not the best, but I am stuck. Jun'an Gao wrote: 4. Each time the client end initiates a new connection it will allocate a new IPv6 address. The allocation may be done randomly, providing client anonymity. How are you going to route those random packets? regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Good bye hegemony - http://sapi.vlsm.org/DLL/linuxrouter
Re: STD-2 is obsolete
Joe Touch wrote: I was not aware that there was ever a proposed STD-1 I-D and/ or last call. STDs are labels of existing standard RFCs which go through the usual procedure. But, neither I was aware that there was ever an I-D and/or a last call for RFC-2600 or RFC-2700. Anyway, is it possible to declare (by whoever) the http://www.iana.org/numbers.htm as STD-2? Or, perhaps a mini RFC as STD-2 that informs where to get the current numbers? The procedure would generally be to update RFC1700, resubmit it, and _then_ have STD-2 point to that new RFC. (something IANA would do) I believe this is a problem. Accurate information exists, but it can not be published because it is not in a traditional RFC format :-(. As far as I know, the recent status is supposed to be at the top of the RFC. As to where to get them, that's already in rfc-index.txt (which is in the same directory as the RFCs): Unfortunately, it is not so obvious (especially for the one who has no idea about the RFC-Editor mechanism) that rfc-index.txt exists. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Good bye hegemony - http://sapi.vlsm.org/DLL/linuxrouter
Re: STD-2 is obsolete
Joe Touch wrote: IANA can't change the status of an STD - that's an IESG action. If you think this matters, I would raise it with the latter. Agreed. I was not aware that there was ever a proposed STD-1 I-D and/ or last call. Anyway, is it possible to declare (by whoever) the http://www.iana.org/numbers.htm as STD-2? Or, perhaps a mini RFC as STD-2 that informs where to get the current numbers? I also believe that more information should be added into an RFC: - where to get an RFC - where to get the recent status of an RFC It is sometimes very confusing for the internet community at large, to trace back the source of accurate information. PS, these following was cited from a standard /etc/services: -- # Note that it is presently the policy of IANA to assign a single well-known # port number for both TCP and UDP; hence, most entries here have two entries # even if the protocol doesn't support UDP operations. # Updated from RFC 1700, ``Assigned Numbers'' (October 1994). Not all ports # are included, only the more common ones. [...] # From ``Assigned Numbers'': # The Registered Ports are not controlled by the IANA and on most systems # can be used by ordinary user processes or programs executed by ordinary # users. # Ports are used in the TCP [45,106] to name the ends of logical # connections which carry long term conversations. For the purpose of # providing services to unknown callers, a service contact port is # defined. This list specifies the port used by the server process as its # contact port. While the IANA can not control uses of these ports it # does register or list uses of these ports as a convienence to the # community. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Good bye hegemony - http://sapi.vlsm.org/DLL/linuxrouter
STD-2 is obsolete
Joe Touch wrote: It is a paradox to begin one standard by selectively omitting current standards (e.g., RFC1122). I believe that that is called "making progress". Cited from section 4.20 of RFC-1336: "I think three factors contribute to the success of the Internet: 1) public documentation of the protocols, 2) free (or cheap) software for the popular machines, and 3) vendor independence." Thus, it is not "end-to-end-purity" or because the existence of any organization. Speaking of keeping standards, I am wondering why STD-2 is still RFC-1700, although the current version is kept by IANA at http://www.iana.org/numbers.htm . regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Good bye hegemony - http://sapi.vlsm.org/DLL/linuxrouter
Re: Wall Street Journal: DNS is not secure
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL WASHINGTON -- Computer experts discovered a flaw in widely used software that could let hackers hijack corporate and government Web sites and steal sensitive e-mail. Instead of WSJ, you might want to refer to http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2001-02.html http://www.isc.org/products/BIND/bind-security.html Anyway, I have spend the whole day to fix zones, since the current BIND does not like "TXT RR" as it used to be :-(. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Gong Xi Fa Cai - Hong Bao Na Lai
Re: FAQ: The IETF+Censored list
Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: The IETF+Censored mailing list I believe that that message itself does not comply BCP-45/RFC-3005. Furthermore, the filter itself is somehow out-of-date. http://www.alvestrand.no/cgi-bin/hta/ietf+censored-filters May I be listed in that filter anyway :^)? regrets, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Good bye hegemony - http://sapi.vlsm.org/DLL/linuxrouter
Re: What happen to ip6.int ?
B. Elzem zgrce wrote: can anyone tell me what is ipv6.int? please :-)) (shortly also i ll search) You can start by reading http://www.iab.org/iab/DOCUMENTS/statement-on-infrastructure-domains.txt Anyway, I could not recall the genesis of ipv6.int. Perhaps: in the beginning, everything was void. Then J.B. Postel created in-addr.arpa which was good. Then, in the gTLD-MoU age with ITU, ipv6.int was proposed... regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Gong Xi Fa Cai - Hong Bao Na Lai
Re: What happen to ip6.int ?
Bill Manning wrote: ip6.int was pre ITU. http://www.itu.int/aboutitu/history/history.html On 17 May 1865 after two and a half months of arduous negotiations, the first International Telegraph Convention was signed by the 20 participating countries and the International Telegraph Union was set up to enable subsequent amendments to this initial agreement to be agreed upon. This marked the birth of the ITU. However, I recall during an IPNG presentation in 1995, that no IPv6 reverse RR has been decided. Therefore, I must have missed something... regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Gong Xi Fa Cai - Hong Bao Na Lai
What happen to ip6.int ?
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ymbk-ip6-arpa-delegation-00.txt This document discusses the need for delegation of the IP6.ARPA DNS zone, and specifies a plan for the technical operation thereof. Hello: Does anyone know what happen to ip6.int ? regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Gong Xi Fa Cai - Hong Bao Na Lai
Re: What happen to ip6.int ?
Patrik Fltstrm wrote: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ymbk-ip6-arpa-delegation-00.txt [...] See http://www.iab.org/iab/DOCUMENTS/statement-on-infrastructure-domains.txt I would like to suggest -- just like in RFC-3026 -- to add to the reference of draft-ymbk-ip6-arpa-delegation-00.txt: X. IAB, "IAB Technical Comment on the Unique DNS Root", RFC 2826, May 2000. Since we never know who are going to read an RFC, how about to add the URL tag to reference (e.g. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2826.txt ) regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Gong Xi Fa Cai - Hong Bao Na Lai
Re: New Internet Service
Get2NIC wrote: ZiplogMail-Free Spam Virus-Proof E-mail Accounts. ROFL PS: - if Major Domo knew how to cope this, he would be General Domo by now :^) -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Gong Xi Fa Cai - Hong Bao Na Lai
Re: about RFC2178
BTW, The IETF-Announce script is still referring to "isi.edu" instead of "rfc-editor.org" Eg, RFC 3038 Title: VCID Notification over ATM link for LDP Author(s): K. Nagami, Y. Katsube, N. Demizu, H. Esaki, [...] I-D Tag:draft-ietf-mpls-vcid-atm-05.txt URL:ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3038.txt ^^^^^^ regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- Aku ini si gembala sapi... oie... http://sapi.vlsm.org
Re: IETF mailing list archive problems
"Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" wrote: I suggest trying ftp to ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-mail-archive/ietf or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-mail-archive/ietf-announce. In general, when looking for stuff at organizations that predate the web, trying ftp is a good idea. Yet other alternate archives: http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-announce http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-last_call http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-protocol_action http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-document_action http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-i-d_action http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-pre2000 http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-rfc http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-wg_action http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-wg_review regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- Aku ini si gembala sapi... oie... http://sapi.vlsm.org
Re: Why the out of office messages aren't an example of misconfiguration.
On 29 Dec 2000: I hate to have to give a basic lesson on this stuff on, of all places, Um... There exists concepts like: - mailing list maintainer - mailing list policy - unsubscribe a mailing list member Therefore, the maintainer should JUST DO IT! PS: As a maintainer, I have been using majordomo, ezmlm, as well as eGroups; eGroups is the best! happy y2k++ -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Oops, I did it again... I am not that innocent... [Spears]
Re: What is the IETF? -- A note of caution
Hello: (I copy this to the poisson list, since I am somehow blocked from the IETF list). I am fully understand what your concern is. But, - what should those "corporate representative" do? - where should they go? best regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- the father of internet (al gore) for IAB -- NOMCOM2000 John W Noerenberg II wrote: As a representative of of one of the co-hosts for this meeting, I am equally gratified and terrorized to have the distinction hosting the largest IETF meeting to date (I fully expect this meeting to be surpassed soon). Fred's summary of the diversity of the IETF was truly impressive. But in retrospect, one thing he said bothered me greatly. He mentioned there were representatives of some five hundred different organizations at this meeting. That too is impressive. But it's that word "representative" I find disquieting. We are here not as corporate representatives, but as individuals committed to building the best Internet we can. Becoming part of a working group means you leave your company badge at the door. As the Internet has become more and more a commercial place, and the setting for business and commerce, the pressure to bend the way the Internet works to one's particular advantage at the expense of others increases. This is not part of our heritage. It is not part of our Tao. We come together because the Internet belongs to no one country, or organization. Rather it exists for all. We can look forward to a Net which not only spans the Earth, but gives every person in every country, the opportunity and the means to learn from any other regardless of their home, their beliefs or their physical capabilities. It is a wonderful thing. And we must remember it is our responsibility to preserve and enhance it for those who will come after. -- john noerenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- If we admire the Net, should not a burden of proof fall on those who would change the basic assumptions that brought it about in the first place? -- David Brin, "The Transparent Society", 1998 --
Re: 1601bis -03: Still Vague
Hello: First of all, it is not over until the RFC-Editor sings :^. Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote: The role descriptions of section 2 remains vague. Thus, the relation with IANA and the RFC Editor will remain vague. It seems quite clear to me. You might want to suggest alternative wording that you think is clearer. It is not about wordsmithing, but more about the fundamentals of section 2. Sub-section 2.1 is about "architectural oversight in more detail". However, it is not clear on how to measure the effectiveness of that sub-section. Thus, it will be not so easy for a NomCom member to evaluate the performance of the IAB. The only clue is perhaps the IAB's long queue of work-in-progress. For example, 1601bis has been more than 4 years in queue. Therefore, the nature of revising 1601bis must not be easy. Nonetheless, there will be no organizational improvement until the IAB is willing continuously to improve itself. See also "Managing The Non-Profit Organization -- Practices and Principles" (Peter F. Drucker, 1990) for more details. "The RFC Editor is chartered by the Internet Society (ISOC) and the Federal Network Council (FNC)" That might have been true at one point, and things have changed. What's the problem with that? Not much, just $1,295,517 regards, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - Here we are,poised on the precipice of suicide slope-Calvin 20Feb89
1601bis -03: Still Vague
Hello: Just a quick comment on 1601bis version 3 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iab-rfc1601bis-03.txt It is not clear on why the IAB does not want to take time for a retreat/ self-assessment of what really works and what not. It seems that the IAB still does not want to empower itself :-(. The role descriptions of section 2 remains vague. Thus, the relation with IANA and the RFC Editor will remain vague. No wonder, if the RFC Editor once has claimed: "The RFC Editor is chartered by the Internet Society (ISOC) and the Federal Network Council (FNC)" (http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc-editor/what-is-rfc-editor.html) OK, it's time for an Oolong Tea Party :^, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - Here we are,poised on the precipice of suicide slope-Calvin 20Feb89
Re: Need Clues: procmail configuration for IETF-Announce
Valdis Kletnieks wrote: I use something like this: [...] Comrades: thank for all replies that I have received. I still need clues on how to rewrite the email headers so that errors do not bounce to unwanted destinations. The split of the IETF Announce list prototype is now available at http://ittf.vlsm.org/announce.html It is provided "as is" with no liability. regards, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - Here we are,poised on the precipice of suicide slope-Calvin 20Feb89
Need Clues: procmail configuration for IETF-Announce
Hello: For the first time in my life, last weekend I read the fine procmail manual. I need some clues on how to configure procmail for splitting the IETF-Announce list; especially separating the I-D ACTION part. If you have one, would you please send me the procmail part of filtering IETF-Announce? See also: http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-rfc/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-wg_action/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-wg_review/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-announce/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-document_action/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-protocol_action/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-last_call/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-i-d_action/ regards, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - What've I got to do, when sorry seems to be the hardest word-John81
Re: 1601bis: The Charter of IAB
Brian E Carpenter wrote: I can read your words, but I really can't understand your concerns. You seem to be worrying about dragons that I can't see. Happy New Year, anyway. Hm... your reply is exactly my concern! Your answer is just based on "can not understand" and not based on any document or past history. Therefore, I would like to see more things in written. Is this by the way how the board in handling appeals? Who is the current IANA and RFC-Ed (chair/head/whatever)? I also believe what Klensin wrote is still valid: .. [... 22 Feb 1996 ... skipping voting out of existence, fine lunches and dinners, and irresolvable controversy pronouncements...] For questions of process, there is really a jury problem, not a technical or architectural expertise one. The IAB membership may have no special competence to make decisions on process matters and, if they were involved in the initial proposals in any way, they may be contaminated relative to making fair choices. I suggest that, for process questions, the right appeals body is a jury-like group that is chosen exactly the way the Nomcomm is chosen -- volunteers from the IETF participant pool and then at random, with no sitting IAB or IESG (or, I'd think, ISOC Trustees) members permitted to volunteer. I don't have an opinion as to whether we pick an appeals panel for a year just in case we need them or pick them only when a sufficient process appeal arises. It is not clear to me that it makes much difference -- except that, if they were picked on demand, we might just take the attendance list from the last few meetings and draw people from it on an "attendance subjects one to the risk on volunteering" basis. That has some drawbacks but some appeal. For the technical error questions, it is still not clear to me that IAB is the right appeals body, especially if they were active in formulating the position under appeal or an alternate to it. A randomly-chosen jury might still work, but might well not have the right technical expertise. As one possibility, we could move toward a formalized blue-ribbon review and mediation panel, with members of that panel being chosen by IESG, the WG leadership, and the individual or group launching the appeal. If it was appropriate to populate that panel with IAB members, that would be fine, but the review itself would not be an IAB responsibility. If the panel didn't behave fairly, that becomes a procedural question, and the appeals board outlined above takes over. It seems that the only thing that I can do is keeping records on who's who were on the board (+when), plus who were the nomcom who had elected them. Let the Vulcans, Klingons, and Ferengis make the final judgements in the next millennium. tabe, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - - Always select ShutDown from the StartMenu - M$Windows after crash
Re: fragmentation?
Hello: If you have not seen Dave Clark's RFC on reassembly, you have missed something. Do you need an RFC #? It was one of the famous "Dave Clark 5" RFCs, somewhere in the later 800s as I remember. 0815 IP datagram reassembly algorithms. D.D. Clark. Jul-01-1982. (Format: TXT=14575 bytes) (Status: UNKNOWN) See also http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0815.txt Gong Xi Fa Cai, Hong Bao Na Lai (=a prosperous millennium :-), -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - - Da da da ich lieb dich nicht du liebst mich nicht aha -- TRIO82 -
NomCom Artifacts
Hello: Just in case interested, there are some NomCom related artifacts (1992-2000) at: http://gnIETF.vlsm.org/#NomCom regards, -- -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim --- -- OSI: Same day service in a nanosecond world --- Interop T-shirt(vJ)
Re: IETF Trivia
Robert Moskowitz wrote: Jan 9, 1996: Robert Moskowitz participated the IAB's Teleconference from a plan (flight number ?). Ho boy, my 15 in of fame! FYI, an update of the list is available at http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf.txt Most parts are *still* in English. But that is subject to change. Yet other underconstruction WG lists are available at http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf-prod.txt (RFC list) http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf-wg.txt(WG chair list) of these following WGs: Applications (app) acap, calsh, cnrp, conneg, dasl, deltav, drums, ediint, fax, ftpext, http, impp, ipp, ldapext, ldup, lsma, madman, msgtrk, nntpext, printmib, schema, tn3270e, trade, urlreg, urn, usefor, webdav, wrec. edi*, imap*, notary*, osids*, telnet*, x400ops*. General (gen) poisson. poised*, poised95*. Internet (int) atommib, dhc, dnsind, frnetmib, ifmib, ion, ip1394, ipcdn, ipfc, ipngwg, ipvbi, l2tpext, pppext, svrloc, zeroconf. atm*, iplpdn*, st2*. IP Next Generation (ipng) -- int catnip*, pip*, sip*, sipp*, tpix*, tuba*. Network Management (mgt) -- ops charmib*, decnetiv*, fddimib*, hostmib*, modemmgt*, snanau* snmpv2*, trmon*, trunkmib*, upsmib*, x25mib*. Operations and Management (ops) 2000, aaa, adslmib, agentx, bmwg, bridge, disman, dnsop, entmib, grip, hubmib, mboned, nasreq, ngtrans, policy, ptopomib, radius, rmonmib, roamops, rps, snmpv3, tewg. bgpdepl*, gisd*, njm*, noop*. Routing (rtg) bgmp, dlswmib, gsmp, idmr, idr, isis, manet, mobileip, mospf, mpls, msdp, ospf, pim, rip, snadlc, udlr, vrrp. bgp*, idpr*, ipidrp*, mobileip*, ripv2*, rolc*, sdr*. Service Applications (sap) -- int dns*, thinosi*. Security (sec) aft, cat, openpgp, dnssec, idwg, ipsec, otp, pkix, secsh, smime, spki, stime, tls, wts, xmldsig. aac*, saag*, pem*. Transport (tsv) avt, diffserv, ecm, enum, intserv, ippm, iptel, issll, malloc, megaco, mmusic, nat, nfsv4, oncrpc, pint, pilc, rap, rmt, rsvp, rtfm, sigtran, sip, spirits, tcpimpl, tcpsat, tsvwg. User Services Area (usv) fyiup, run, uswg, weird. 822ext*, iafa*, ids*, iiir*, isn*, mimecont*, mimemhs*, nir*, nisi*, nntp*, trainmat*, uri*, userdoc2*, wnils*. regards, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim VLSM-TJT -- http://www.vlsm.org/rms46/ - - 3705, 3720, 3725, 3745, 2216, 12000 GSR: I survived SNA (m/tic) -
