setting aside interpretation and semantics for a moment, would there be
utility in maintaining tables for each instance of Unicode?
v
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Paul Hoffman paul.hoff...@vpnc.org wrote:
On Jun 7, 2011, at 6:24 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
I think this is an improvement
thanks Ben, input much appreciated - minor comments can be addressed
by the document editor.
v
On Oct 13, 2009, at 5:36 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
Thomas,
we are so close to the finish line that I don't think it is worth the
time and potential controversy to revise the charter beyond giving
flexibility on the mapping matter.
The notion of including a non-normative mapping document was very late
in the process and the charter just
seems odd to me too, James.
vint
On Jul 3, 2008, at 6:14 PM, James Seng wrote:
At the moment, the condition is no single Unicode code point. To
the extent that a single CJK ideograph can be expressed using a
single Unicode code point, this would represent the situation to
which you say you
or two long
and the menu selection provides an extra check about false
matches).
john
--On Thursday, 03 July, 2008 19:04 -0400 Vint Cerf
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
seems odd to me too, James.
vint
On Jul 3, 2008, at 6:14 PM, James Seng wrote:
At the moment, the condition is no single
even if WorldCom enters chapter 11, I am confident that UUNET and the MAE Systems will
continue to operate
normally.
vint
At 01:45 AM 7/14/2002 +0100, Rob Evans wrote:
This is decidedly off-topic for this list, but the current Worldcom
transit is both backed up by another provider and only
no KPN is the dutch company that held a joint venture with QWEST and this JV owned
EBONE.
Users were transitioned to a network owned by KPN if my information is correct.
vint
At 10:40 PM 7/11/2002 -0400, Bill Cunningham wrote:
Dear Loyd Wood,
That E-bone collapse you spoke of a few days
Discussion list??
vint
At 12:01 PM 5/1/2002 +0200, Alexandre Dulaunoy wrote:
On Wed, 1 May 2002, vint cerf wrote:
At 03:00 PM 5/1/2002 +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For instance, it could assert that the assumed
state was that information was in the public domain, and resist the move
well, keith since we cannot amend RFCs maybe you should prepare one of your own?
I am not sure that the idea of killing intellectual property is the right one either.
We all know there is something wrong with the current set up but I am no sure that
the wholesale dispatch of Intellectual Property
i think people should be free to create and share but that those who wish to claim
rights should not be prevented from doing so.
vint
At 12:14 AM 5/1/2002 -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
however, there seems to be a strong and alarming tendency for global legal frameworks
on
IPR to discourage,
IP is encapsulated in PPP for all practical purposes PPP can support
multiple protocols on a single point to point link in the same way
ethernet can support multiple protocols
vint
At 08:01 AM 3/1/2002 -0500, Bill Cunningham wrote:
Is IP actually encapsulated in PPP, or is PPP and IP sent out at
Mike,
actually DCA had only responsibility for the ARPANET
and MILNET, officially. The rest were the responsibility
of the network operators - usually schools and research labs.
In 1981 the CSNET project brought up non-DoD components
including PhoneNet and the X.25 extension of Internet
yes - Phone Net (University of Delaware developed) and the Telenet (X.25)
vint
At 11:03 AM 1/24/2002 -0500, Michael Hammer wrote:
Quick question: Could one university communicate to another university without going
through the ARPANET?
Mike
this formulation does not take into account the transfer
of responsibility and authority for policy increasingly
to NSF and to the so-called Federal Networking Council
after about 1988. NSF's role increased substantially
with the creation of the NSFNET.
In any case the principal point is that
with apologies to IETFers and Fred Baker in particular:
recent ICANN nominations to Board service:
the PSO renominated me to serve on the board for another 3 years
the ASO nominated Lyman Chapin to serve for three years
vint cerf
At 02:32 AM 9/21/2001 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A case
consider a twist of ribbon as an alternative?
vint
At 08:11 AM 9/13/2001 -0400, stan kulikowski ii wrote:
I was wondering, and I have asked the firm where I
work, if all web sites (commercial and otherwise)
should go dark in memory of the victims today.
on this suggestion, i put my entry
there is the problem of spoofing that makes this somewhat
more difficult that is outlined below.
vint
At 02:43 PM 4/2/2001 +0800, R.Z. Pan wrote:
Hi, all:
I'm a newbie from P.R.China and I do some load balance stuffs. I noticed
that HTTP Protocol has a redirection mechanism to lead user to
we never actually did this though
vint
At 05:52 PM 1/25/2001 -0800, Peter Ford wrote:
Ah, dual stacks, a time tested transition strategy. But there was some Application
Layer Gateway cruft (ALG) although not at the level of sophistication and beauty of a
NAT ...
From RFC 801:
Because all
a nightmare it seems to me
v
At 02:39 PM 1/20/2001 -0800, Bernard D. Aboba wrote:
What is worth thinking about is what this will imply for the future
internet architecture. It is one thing to address issues brought up by a
single well functioning NAT within the same administrative domain. It
keep it simple. roughly: be tolerant in what you receive and
conservative in what you send - (to promote interoperability).
vint
At 05:11 PM 12/7/2000 -0500, Dan Kolis wrote:
General question:
Jon Postel got amazing results... Many of the old(er) timers in this
business must have talked to
Mr. Ohta has put his finger on a key point: ability of all
parties to generate email addresses, web page URLs and so on.
Even if we introduce extended character sets, it seems vital
that there be some form of domain name that can be rendered
(and entered) as simple IA4 characters to assure
from a purely mechanical point of view, if the character encoding
of these two strings makes them distinct, one might have to treat
them as distinct registrations - unless a very mechanical means of
converting them both into some canonical form were available to
make them "match" - one would
however the value of the public Internet is surely in its widespread
accessibility and interoperability.
vint
At 05:10 PM 12/5/2000 +0900, Martin J. Duerst wrote:
I think there is a difference between making it technically possible
for everybody to participate in whatever community they want,
In my opinion, it is vital to craft Internet's evolution so as to maintain
full connectivity and interworking among all its parts. I do not see
"balkanization" as a good thing at all. I believe there are sound technical
means to achieve the objective of incorporating character sets associated
I don't think the issue is "weight" as much as it is the
rights to intellectual property contained within the I-D
(and here I mean intellectual property in the most general
sense of the term so as to include copyrights and also
other intellectual property rights).
At least that's where a good
Robert,
I think the I-D are explicitly NOT public domain. Even in WG form, they
carry rights held by the author and implicit licenses to the WG for
derivative works. To make something public domain I think you have
to take a fairly definite action or declaration since the most recent
revisions
in the Internet environment, and in particular in the I-D environment,
this could be particularly difficult. Maybe the search engines will help :-)
v
At 11:06 AM 10/1/2000 -0700, Melinda Shore wrote:
If one were to get anal about it, legally intellectual
property claims have to be actively
the twist between I-D and lab notebook is that the I-D is
often an explicitly shared document (group lab notebook).
Vint
however, ISTF might be a good place to pursue such ideas.
see www.istf.org or www.istf.isoc.org
vint
At 12:52 PM 9/5/2000 -0500, Dave Crocker wrote:
At 11:31 AM 9/5/00 +0200, Barathy, RamaSubramaniam wrote:
Would it not be nice to have some sort of quality control task force that
assigns a
29 matches
Mail list logo
