Re: Last Call: Instructions to Request for Comments (RFC) Authors to BCP

2003-03-05 Thread Kireeti Kompella
Hi, On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, The IESG wrote: > The IESG has received a request to consider Instructions to Request for > Comments (RFC) Authors as a BCP. > This has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an IETF > Working Group. > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks

Re: Last Call: Instructions to Request for Comments (RFC) Authors to BCP

2003-03-05 Thread Bob Braden
*> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Mar 5 15:59:37 2003 *> Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 18:41:15 -0500 *> From: Keith Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> *> To: Geoff Huston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> *> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] *> Subject: Re: Last Call: Inst

Re: Last Call: Instructions to Request for Comments (RFC) Authors to BCP

2003-03-05 Thread Keith Moore
> 2. section 2.5 > > "When a .ps version is published, the RFC Editor will also publish a > corresponding .pdf version by using the 'distill' utility." > > I'm sure that the RFC Editor(s) would agree that all software is transient, > and a reference to "the 'distill' utility" should be accompa

Re: Last Call: Instructions to Request for Comments (RFC) Authors to BCP

2003-03-05 Thread Geoff Huston
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing lists by 2003-4-8. Files can be obtained via http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-04.txt

Re: [Asrg] SHEESH!

2003-03-05 Thread Vernon Schryver
> From: "Chris Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I guess I shouldn't have used the V-word when talking about spam on > > the IRTF's mailing list about spam. > > > sheesh!--talk about utterly lame and misguided spam filters. > > But in the case of the V word, it works. ... I wonder if you'd say that

SHEESH!

2003-03-05 Thread Vernon Schryver
I guess I shouldn't have used the V-word when talking about spam on the IRTF's mailing list about spam. sheesh!--talk about utterly lame and misguided spam filters. Vernon Schryver[EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Spam mail warning notificatio

IAB policy - Spam, etc

2003-03-05 Thread Dan Kolis
Paul Vixie said: >a long time ago i warned that the real victim of spam would be "openness" >and that when closed communities with gates started appearing, then we would >all know that we had lost the battle. what i failed to predict was how long >the "losing" would last before "lost" was general

RE: Last Call: Routing Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS vto Proposed Standard

2003-03-05 Thread Kireeti Kompella
Hi Stephen, On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Stephen Shew wrote: > Kireeti, I can provide text but I need about a day to think about it and > write it succinctly. That's plenty quick. > On the matter of the limitations of bandwidth value, I > can live with your suggestions (a) and (b). Great! Kireeti.

beauty of freedom

2003-03-05 Thread Bill Cunningham
Just something to throw out I was browsing an ftp site a few days ago and came across some interesting downloads that got me thinking. On the same site (and the same page) I saw a piece of software to abtain email addresses to send of spam :O , and on the same page, a filter to block spam. Wi