Hi, Todd,
On 2009-4-14, at 22:21, Todd Glassey wrote:
Fernando Gont wrote:
Lars Eggert wrote:
I agree with Joe that some of the hardening techniques that
vendors are
implementing come with consequences (make TCP more brittle). To
me, this
is a *reason* this document should be published
On 14 apr 2009, at 16:37, IETF Secretariat wrote:
Be sure to make your reservation at one of the Stockholm hotels the
IETF
has a block of rooms held. Cutoff dates for the blocks are relatively
early.
No kidding: some are next week.
Hotel information can be found at:
Iljitsch van Beijnum iljit...@muada.com wrote:
Hotel information can be found at:
http://www.ietf.org/meetings/75/hotels.html
Some of the phone numbers have a (0) in there. Is this the European
(0) which means if you don't know that you sometimes have to remove
that 0 you will get
I don't think an RFC is needed. Unless I am mistaken, the + format,
leaving out leading 0s was introduced by CCITT (now ITU) in the Red
Book back in 1984, perhaps even in earlier works.
Ole
Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972
Hi,
On 2009-4-14, at 20:51, Fernando Gont wrote:
Lars Eggert wrote:
My personal take is that the IETF is responsible for the
maintenance of
its protocols, and this effort carried ut by the UK CPNI should be
welcome, and the IETF should take the chance and benefit from this
work
to publish
Hi
Here some info that might be useful when you visit Stockholm. I don't claim it
to be the complete manual and others welcome to add info and correct where
needed.
Getting from Arlanda to the City:
There are a number of alternatives. If you want it cheap you take the bus and
then the
Ole,
You're not mistaken - the standard + format is defined in ITU-T
Recommendation E.123 (http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-E.123/en).
- Lyman
On Apr 15, 2009, at 7:17 AM, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
I don't think an RFC is needed. Unless I am mistaken, the + format,
leaving out leading 0s was
A NAT that if it's external IP was 1.2.3.4, any time it saw the binary
pattern 0x01020304 passing through it in any data it would replace it
with the nats internal IP. (Many NATS call this feature a Generic
ALG so if you see a NAT with that, run screaming) Most stuff worked
fine but the
Lars Eggert wrote:
Hi, Todd,
On 2009-4-14, at 22:21, Todd Glassey wrote:
Fernando Gont wrote:
Lars Eggert wrote:
I agree with Joe that some of the hardening techniques that vendors
are
implementing come with consequences (make TCP more brittle). To me,
this
is a *reason* this document
Be sure to make your reservation at one of the Stockholm hotels the IETF
has a block of rooms held.
For these hotels, is the IETF group rate always less than (or equal
to) the non-group rate? Apparently this was not always the case in
San Francisco.
Ross.
Hi -
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum iljit...@muada.com
To: IETF Discussion Mailing List ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 2:49 AM
Subject: Re: 75th IETF - Hotels
...
Do we have an RFC for how to format phone numbers?
ITU E.123 would be what you want.
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009, Randy Presuhn wrote:
Do we have an RFC for how to format phone numbers?
ITU E.123 would be what you want.
http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-E.123-200102-I/e
Clause 2.8 hints at those annoying parenthesized things,
and 7.2 makes it clear it's not an appropriate notation
for
Dave,
Good advice, everyone should follow this. But lets not get overly
worried though. In my experience Stockholm is one of the safest possible
places to visit. And a great place, particularly in the summer! Of
course, being careful whether home or abroad is always a good idea.
Don't drink
More personal comments, based on having lost a laptop to a two-man
team at the exit to the Brussels train station in the last two
months
I got hit upon arrival to the country, where I was badly jetlagged
after arriving early into London Heathrow, and then taking a
connecting flight to
Does others also have a problem in reserving a room
at the Clarion Sign? I get only a generic error message
the the system can not process the reservation and
I should check my data...
Best regards
Michael
On Apr 15, 2009, at 11:49 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 14 apr 2009, at 16:37,
On Apr 14, 2009, at 3:31 AM, Ralph Droms wrote:
Now, I admit I'm describing a hypothetical and abstract scenario. I
don't have a specific example of a situation in which a host might
make decisions - either in the stack or in an application or ??? -
about outbound traffic based on knowledge of
Michael Tüxen wrote:
Does others also have a problem in reserving a room
at the Clarion Sign? I get only a generic error message
the the system can not process the reservation and
I should check my data...
Best regards
Michael
We believe we succeeded, but there was some wierdness. There were
Excerpts from Ted Lemon on Tue, Apr 14, 2009 02:48:06PM -0700:
I don't mean to minimize this issue - if in fact there is some
future real-world scenario where this would be a serious problem,
it would be good if we could anticipate it.
I'm just saying the WG should make an explicit
I think this charter requires some clarifications. Since this is about
extensions to NETLMM protocols, it should clarify what principles it inherits
from the NETLMM charter. For instance, one major thing that stands out is
about no changes to the mobile node - I believe NETLMM's main value
I support this version of the document.
Tony Hansen
t...@att.com
The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Internet Mail Architecture '
draft-crocker-email-arch-12.txt as a Proposed Standard
The
The IPSECME WG will have a conference call on Tuesday, 5 May 2009 at 15:00
GMT (11:00 EDT, 08:00 PDT), for two hours. We are planning on the same
format as the previous time: a VoIP conference bridge and posted slides.
Details for the meeting can be found on the IPSECME Wiki page:
21 matches
Mail list logo
