I have not signed the petition because I did not think it was proper to do so
(as a IAOC member - see Russ's message and RFC 3777)
but, that aside, I do support the petition - I feel that the IAOC has given
Marshal
the full opportunity to start participating again or to resign and he has done
On Nov 3, 2012, at 5:39 AM, Scott O Bradner wrote:
I have not signed the petition because I did not think it was proper to do
so (as a IAOC member - see Russ's message and RFC 3777)
but, that aside, I do support the petition - I feel that the IAOC has given
Marshal
the full
--On Thursday, 01 November, 2012 22:22 -0400 Michael StJohns
mstjo...@comcast.net wrote:
I assume at this point the IAOC would like to pursue the
recall option? If not, please be very clear about it to the
list as I haven't actually seen a request from the IAOC for
that process to proceed
On Nov 2, 2012, at 3:56 PM, John R Levine jo...@taugh.com wrote:
Why does the mailing list memberships reminder send passwords in the
clear?
Because that's what Mailman does. Send code.
And that's acceptable to the IETF? You're kidding me, right?
I can't speak for the IETF, but I do
John,
Why does the mailing list memberships reminder send passwords in the clear?
Because that's what Mailman does. Send code.
And that's acceptable to the IETF? You're kidding me, right?
P.
Sabahattin,
Thanks for the detailed info.
I've been getting passwords mailed to me monthly for years. Someone
pointed out the disable option just yesterday.
So I've selected the option, but that's hardly the point: the option
should default to OFF and not be enable-able so passwords are
John,
I can't speak for the IETF, but I do note that the same password
notices have been going out on the first of every month for years.
You just noticed iit now?
No, I've been getting the passwords for years. However I just finished a
crypto class and really wondered what the history is
On Nov 2, 2012, at 3:39 PM, Paul Aitken pait...@cisco.com wrote:
John,
Why does the mailing list memberships reminder send passwords in the
clear?
Because that's what Mailman does. Send code.
And that's acceptable to the IETF? You're kidding me, right?
Because the security is
John:
I assume at this point the IAOC would like to pursue the
recall option? If not, please be very clear about it to the
list as I haven't actually seen a request from the IAOC for
that process to proceed as far as I can tell.
Because I am personally very reluctant to see this handled
I am NomCom-eligible and I sign this petition.
--Paul Hoffman
All,
Many tahanks for the clarification, the situation is clear enough.
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Russ Housley hous...@vigilsec.com wrote:
John:
At the end of our visit, I believe that Marshall understood that there
were three possibilities:
1) Tell the community that he
On 2 Nov 2012, at 21:51, John Levine jo...@taugh.com wrote:
Only majordomo2, which has been unmaintained for a while now (and
it's author calls it Dead holds much of a chance, but I doubt it
?would work for the IETF in its current condition.
Actually, MJ2 works great, I've been using it in
On Thu 01/Nov/2012 18:31:47 -0400 Russ Housley wrote:
A formal policy requires IETF consensus, and it would be published
as a BCP in the RFC series.
Isn't that's something the IETF will have do in any case, sooner or later?
AFAICU, standardization is about establishing the competition rules.
Russ,
Thanks very much for the clarification.
Olafur,
Go ahead and add me to the signature list. I am Nomcom-eligible.
john
--On Saturday, 03 November, 2012 11:36 -0400 Russ Housley
hous...@vigilsec.com wrote:
John:
I assume at this point the IAOC would like to pursue the
recall
14 matches
Mail list logo
