On 22 Sep 2010, at 19:48, Tony Finch wrote:
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010, Dave Cridland wrote:
Possibly. It's worth noting that format-flowed, for instance, is well
supported
with the notable exception of Outlook. Apple's MUAs have stopped using
format=flowed and now use really long lines
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
Just out of curiosity, where did you get confirmation that Apple Mail
behaves the way it does for the reason it does?
Can't remember, sorry.
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/
HUMBER THAMES DOVER WIGHT PORTLAND: NORTH
Has the IETF (or rather then IAB) written any simple documents that
explain to less informed (i.e. marketing/product) managers why it is a
bad thing for a captive portal to spoof DNS replies?
(not just in regard to DNSSEC, but also in regards to just caching)
--
] He who is tired of Weird
--On Thursday, September 23, 2010 10:43 -0700 Randy Dunlap
rdun...@xenotime.net wrote:
...
the same people also complain when I trim.
So its a combination of pathological behaviours, UI, and
dominance behaviour
That should just be a function of where the UI software
positions the
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 09:09:08 -0400 John C Klensin wrote:
--On Thursday, September 23, 2010 10:43 -0700 Randy Dunlap
rdun...@xenotime.net wrote:
...
the same people also complain when I trim.
So its a combination of pathological behaviours, UI, and
dominance behaviour
That
I tend to assume that people write emails the way they would like to
read them.
Thus, if I am writing an email with a lot of detailed context from a
previous message, I include the revelant portions of the message, and
reply in line.
However, when I am writing A reply that does not require
On Sep 22, 2010, at 9:44 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
At 10:21 AM -0600 9/22/10, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 9/14/10 12:51 AM, Stefan Santesson wrote:
General:
I would consider stating that server certificates according to this profile
either MUST or SHOULD have the serverAuth EKU set since it
On 09/23/2010 01:10 PM, Richard L. Barnes wrote:
There is no black magic here, only the magic of the TLS server_name
extension. If the client provides server_name=gmail.com, the server
provides a gmail.com cert, otherwise it defaults to mail.google.com.
Your browser is following two secure
At Fri, 24 Sep 2010 07:21:21 -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
Has the IETF (or rather then IAB) written any simple documents that
explain to less informed (i.e. marketing/product) managers why it
is a bad thing for a captive portal to spoof DNS replies?
(not just in regard to DNSSEC, but
This document is probably relevant, although it goes the route of
providing guidelines for minimum breakage rather than forbidding.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-livingood-dns-redirect-02
On Sep 24, 2010, at 8:38 AM, Alfred HÎnes wrote:
At Fri, 24 Sep 2010 07:21:21 -0400, Michael
On Sep 24, 2010, at 11:36 AM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
I tend to assume that people write emails the way they would like to read
them.
Thus, if I am writing an email with a lot of detailed context from a previous
message, I include the revelant portions of the message, and reply in line.
c) draft-livingood-dns-redirect and draft-livingood-dns-malwareprotect
draft-livingood-dns-malwareprotect concerns what is primarily an opt-in
service to block known malware sites for end users. Hopefully that is
less controversial than the redirect one, but who knows.
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010, John C Klensin wrote:
FWIW, the thing that really irritates me is having someone respond to a
message after quoting only a few lines (often good) but without
supplying some clue that permits me to find the message being replied to
if needed. [...] or even using a good
At 6:18 PM + 9/24/10, Livingood, Jason wrote:
I'm a bit conflicted
though about whether to keep it as informational or consider historic.
If it describes something that you believe is currently deployed, even if you
think that deployment is non-optimal, it should be marked as Informational.
On Sep 24, 2010, at 8:38 AM, Alfred HÎnes wrote:
At Fri, 24 Sep 2010 07:21:21 -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
Has the IETF (or rather then IAB) written any simple documents that
explain to less informed (i.e. marketing/product) managers why it
is a bad thing for a captive portal to spoof
IANAL but would think that such practice should expose the operator
of the server or proxy to civil and/or criminal action, both from the
operators of the zones whose RRs are being misrepresented, and from
the users' whose applications are affected.
I'm not a lawyer either, but I at least know
On Sep 24, 2010, at 5:17 19PM, John Levine wrote:
IANAL but would think that such practice should expose the operator
of the server or proxy to civil and/or criminal action, both from the
operators of the zones whose RRs are being misrepresented, and from
the users' whose applications are
It will be interesting to see what will happen to these services when DNSSEC
is used more widely.
Plan A: few consumers will use DNSSEC between their PCs and the ISP's
resolver, so they won't notice.
Plan B: consumers will observe that malicious impersonation of far away
DNS servers is
Plan A: few consumers will use DNSSEC between their PCs and the ISP's
resolver, so they won't notice.
Plan B: consumers will observe that malicious impersonation of far away
DNS servers is rare and exotic, but malware spam arrives hourly, so they
will make a rational tradeoff, take their ISP's
On 24September2010Friday, at 17:16, John Levine wrote:
Plan A: few consumers will use DNSSEC between their PCs and the ISP's
resolver, so they won't notice.
Plan B: consumers will observe that malicious impersonation of far away
DNS servers is rare and exotic, but malware spam arrives
--On Friday, September 24, 2010 08:17 -0700 Randy Dunlap
rdun...@xenotime.net wrote:
One thing that bothers me is when people do mixed-line posting
but end their reply say, 50% thru the message, but then they
don't delete the rest of the message, so the reader has to scan
the rest of the
Tony == Tony Finch d...@dotat.at writes:
Tony On Fri, 24 Sep 2010, John C Klensin wrote:
FWIW, the thing that really irritates me is having someone
respond to a message after quoting only a few lines (often good)
but without supplying some clue that permits me to find the
Hi Folks,
List of Willing Nominees has been updated:
--
The second announced listing of willing nominees for the IETF open
positions is now available at
https://wiki.tools.ietf.org/group/nomcom/10/input/
In the past, such information was available only
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Web Linking'
draft-nottingham-http-link-header-10.txt as a Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 6019
Title: BinaryTime: An Alternate Format for
Representing Date and Time in ASN.1
Author: R. Housley
Status: Standards Track
Stream:
25 matches
Mail list logo
