re: Mail sent to midcom
I think this discussion is revealing a deep truth and avoiding that truth at the same time. the real root-cause of this discussion is the assertion of identity as determined by email address. that's the operational basis for any kind of "subscription" model based on email address. the whole "moderation" thing is really about the identity of posters, not their email address, and the imputed motives for their posting. on the one hand, it's hard to argue that it is unreasonable to try and protect WG discourse from individuals with "hostile" motives. the problem, though, is the technology currently has not strong notion of identity upon which to base such a determination other than email address. once upon a time, people were lucky to have *one* email address and a given individual tended to be associated with that email address in a very strong way, enough so that people decided it was a sufficient indicator of identity. today, with many more people having email addresses and many people having more than one email address for good and righteous reasons, that model simply doesn't work anymore. it isn't a "good-bad" thing, it's a "not applicable at the current scale" thing. it did work - it doesn't work anymore. if we want to do such discrimination based on the identity of the poster, (and i happen to believe *lots* of people want to do this), then we need to get busy and improve the technology and stop trying to pound the tree-trunk through the small knot-hole. -mo ps - no, i didn't say anything about removing anonymity, if people do not wish to assert an identity in an email, that's fine with me. the recipients can use that tidbit of information as they see fit.
Re: More member-only anti-spam
Lloyd, My explanation was probably a bit too short but it is not only members who can send mails to the udlr mailing list but also non members as long as they reply to a confirmation message. Spamers don't reply to confirmation messages, furtunately. When I was at INRIA, I was administrating the UDLR mailing list, adding and deleting emails manually from the list of members (it was taking me more and more time...). Meanwhile, we started to receive spams like "how to be a millionaire", "how to get a degree in computing" as well as pointers to X sites... Members were strongly complaining about these mails asking me to do something efficient enough to stop this. As a result, INRIA put in place a mechanism to add/delete members automaticaly to/from the UDLR mailing list. It was also supposed to stop spaming, and I believe it still works pretty well. Today, when a non-member sends a mail to the mailing list, a confirmation message is sent back to him. If the non-member replies to it, the original mail is forwarded to the mailing list. Generally, if the non-member is a spamer, he will never reply to the confirmation. I believe that non-members can still send mails to the UDLR mailing list, it just takes one extra-step. Would this cost be too high for an antispam measure ? Anyway, if there is a standard way to administrate a mailing list, I will be very glad to hear about it and see what I can do with INRIA. Regards, Emmanuel -- Lloyd Wood wrote: On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Emmanuel Duros wrote on udlr: I am forwarding this mails to the udlr mailing list. There has been for several months an anti-spam mechanism at INRIA. It basicaly prevents unsubscribed people from sending mails to the mailing list. Unfortunately, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is one of them... [..] quite important forwarded mail of 10 Feb, indicating udlr draft moving to proposed standard, snipped. You just can't do members-only on IETF WG lists. See recent discussion on poisson. I'd suggest moving the list elsewhere... Antispam measures interfere with the normal business of the IETF, to its detriment. L. [EMAIL PROTECTED]PGPhttp://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/ -- UDcast, Sophia Antipolis France Tel : +33 (0)4 93 00 16 60 - Mob : +33 (0)6 14 21 56 06 Fax : +33 (0)4 93 00 16 61 UDcast: Where IP and UniDirectional links meet http://www.UDcast.com
Re: More member-only anti-spam
At 07:44 13/02/01, Lloyd Wood wrote: You just can't do members-only on IETF WG lists. See recent discussion on poisson. I'd suggest moving the list elsewhere... I'm not sure what "members-only" means in your usage. Self-moderated[1] lists have been permitted for some years in IETF business, provided that non-subscriber email goes to some human who then posts the on-topic email. The IESG have put authoritative information online at: http://www.ietf.org/IESG/STATEMENTS/moderated-lists.txt, which folks ought to at least review prior to commenting further. Ran [EMAIL PROTECTED] speaking only for myself [1] A self-moderated list is one that accepts postings from a source email address that is subscribed to the list but declines to accept postings from source email address that is not on the list. Most usually, postings from a source email address that is not subscribed to the list would go to a human list administrator.
Media Access Control list
Does anyone have a link for a listing of assigned vendor MAC addresses? Someone said the IEEE has a list, but I was unable to find it on their website.
Re: More member-only anti-spam
Speaking as co-Chair of POISSON, before we go too far down this discussion right now, POISSON will be taking up the topic of requirements for IETF mailing lists with the goal of producing a suitable document (or two or three or whatever). Please be patient for a short while longer and watch for the announcement on "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". If you're interested in this topic I would suggest you subscribe to that mailing list now, by sending a message with the single word "subscribe" in the body to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". Thanks, Jim On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Lloyd Wood wrote: Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 12:44:56 + (GMT) From: Lloyd Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: More member-only anti-spam On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Emmanuel Duros wrote on udlr: I am forwarding this mails to the udlr mailing list. There has been for several months an anti-spam mechanism at INRIA. It basicaly prevents unsubscribed people from sending mails to the mailing list. Unfortunately, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is one of them... [..] quite important forwarded mail of 10 Feb, indicating udlr draft moving to proposed standard, snipped. You just can't do members-only on IETF WG lists. See recent discussion on poisson. I'd suggest moving the list elsewhere... Antispam measures interfere with the normal business of the IETF, to its detriment. L. [EMAIL PROTECTED]PGPhttp://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/
Re: Media Access Control list
Does anyone have a link for a listing of assigned vendor MAC addresses? Someone said the IEEE has a list, but I was unable to find it on their website. If you mean OUIs, the original database is at http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/oui.txt there's a searchable version on my site: http://rgfsparc.cr.usgs.gov:8090/sysadmin/oui.html although it might be a bit out of date (I'll try to update it soon). Cheers, RGF Robert G. Ferrell, CISSP Who goeth without humor goeth unarmed.
Relation email - person (re: Mail sent to midcom)
At 09:11 13/02/2001 -0500, Mike O'Dell wrote: today, with many more people having email addresses and many people having more than one email address for good and righteous reasons, that model simply doesn't work anymore. it isn't a "good-bad" thing, it's a "not applicable at the current scale" thing. it did work - it doesn't work anymore. I recently had the dubious pleasure of sending out 40.000 emails to a set of email addresses gathered (with the owners' approval!) over a period of seven years. The result was roughly 10.000 bounces (naturally), dozens of requests to merge multiple registrations for the same person, and on the order of FIVE occurences of an email address previously used by one person now being used by another. The mapping address - person is pretty strong, and mostly single-valued. The mapping person - address is multivalued, and getting more so. Not quite "not working", if we take it for what it is. -- Harald Tveit Alvestrand, [EMAIL PROTECTED] +47 41 44 29 94 Personal email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Media Access Control list
Look for OUIs. http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/index.shtml http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/OUI.html ~Randy_ From: Rakers, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Does anyone have a link for a listing of assigned vendor MAC addresses? Someone said the IEEE has a list, but I was unable to find it on their website.
Re: Media Access Control list
Does anyone have a link for a listing of assigned vendor MAC addresses? Someone said the IEEE has a list, but I was unable to find it on their website. Try: http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/oui.txt There's a search interface at: http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/index.shtml Ned
RE: Media Access Control list
Try this url http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/index.shtml -Original Message- From: Rakers, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 10:05 AM To: IETF mailing list (E-mail) Subject: Media Access Control list Does anyone have a link for a listing of assigned vendor MAC addresses? Someone said the IEEE has a list, but I was unable to find it on their website.
Re: Media Access Control list
Yo Jason! You can try IANA: http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/ethernet-numbers Or better yet, Cavebear: http://www.cavebear.com/CaveBear/Ethernet/vendor.html RGDS GARY --- Gary E. Miller Rellim 20340 Empire Ave, Suite E-3, Bend, OR 97701 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel:+1(541)382-8588 Fax: +1(541)382-8676 On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Rakers, Jason wrote: Does anyone have a link for a listing of assigned vendor MAC addresses? Someone said the IEEE has a list, but I was unable to find it on their website.
RE: Media Access Control list
Title: RE: Media Access Control list You can download the public OUI list from here: http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/index.shtml -Original Message- From: Rakers, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 8:05 AM To: IETF mailing list (E-mail) Subject: Media Access Control list Does anyone have a link for a listing of assigned vendor MAC addresses? Someone said the IEEE has a list, but I was unable to find it on their website. - This message was passed through [EMAIL PROTECTED], which is a sublist of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Not all messages are passed. Decisions on what to pass are made solely by Harald Alvestrand.
Re: Relation email - person (re: Mail sent to midcom)
Harald Alvestrand wrote: The mapping address - person is pretty strong, and mostly single-valued. Interesting. Hypothesis: this might happen because (a) ISPs (in the US) try to avoid reusing addresses in order to avoid ECPA problems; and (b) corporations try to avoid reusing addresses because they'd rather have email bounce than have confidential information go to the wrong person. -- /==\ |John Stracke| http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own.| |Chief Scientist |=| |eCal Corp. |Campbell's has it wrong--it's "Never | |[EMAIL PROTECTED]|underestimate the power of *chocolate*". | \==/
Re: Relation email - person (re: Mail sent to midcom)
Hypothesis: this might happen because (a) ISPs (in the US) try to avoid reusing addresses in order to avoid ECPA problems; and (b) corporations try to avoid reusing addresses because they'd rather have email bounce than have confidential information go to the wrong person. I also wonder about Harald's sample - might this particular group of people be more likely to - understand the value of a stable email address - pick a ISP that provides good service and has good potential for longevity - have his/her own personal domain name - forward his/her mail from older addresses to newer ones. than the average email user? (though presumably IETF folks are also more likely to fit the above criteria than the average email user) Keith
RE: Media Access Control list
Thanks, this is what I am looking for! -Original Message- From: Dunlap, Randy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 1:54 PM To: 'Rakers, Jason'; IETF mailing list (E-mail) Subject: RE: Media Access Control list Look for OUIs. http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/index.shtml http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/OUI.html ~Randy_ From: Rakers, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Does anyone have a link for a listing of assigned vendor MAC addresses? Someone said the IEEE has a list, but I was unable to find it on their website.
Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1)
At 10:30 PM 2/6/2001 +0800, Jun'an Gao wrote: So transport layer should somehow enhance the error check and/or correction mechanism. actually, I would put it in the application layer. I would have the application include some form of checksum (PGP signature, file CRC, whatever) to ensure for itself that what was sent was what was received.
Re: Relation email - person (re: Mail sent to midcom)
From: John Stracke [EMAIL PROTECTED] The mapping address - person is pretty strong, and mostly single-valued. Interesting. Hypothesis: this might happen because (a) ISPs (in the US) try to avoid reusing addresses in order to avoid ECPA problems; and (b) corporations try to avoid reusing addresses because they'd rather have email bounce than have confidential information go to the wrong person. To the contrary is the corollary to "never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity." The corollary goes something like "never attribute to careful planning or reviews by lawyers (e.g. privacy issues) that which can be explained by laziness." It's hard to know when a username is truely defunct. If you recycle a username too soon you cause grief, from mail going to the wrong place to not forwarding ex-employee mail (many outfits still do) to not being able to accommodate a customer that left inadvertently (e.g. failed to pay a bill) to minimizing hassles with false spam complaints. You must wait at least a few weeks and probably at least 3 months before recycling a username. That implies that the lazy tactic of rarely or never recycling usernames is best. And that has implications for the (address-person) relation. Note also that the "dictionary attack" spammers are trying hard to teach people to pick usernames that are globally unique. (Those are the spammers with lists of several 100 and perhaps 1000's of common usernames that they mix with their lists of domains. Never mind that their lists make dandy spam traps, addresses that trap SMTP bodies that are rejected when later sent to real addreses.) Vernon Schryver[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet Governance - UPDATE
FYI: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Jay Fenello [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:09:41 -0500 Subject: [awpd] Internet Governance - UPDATE Hello, For everyone who is interested in what's wrong with our country, our society, our government, and our world ... ... Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT), Chairman of the Communications Subcommittee of the Senate's Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, will be holding hearings on ICANN tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building. ICANN is the secretive new Internet Governance body formed under the Clinton administration back in 1998. Critics charge that it is a front for multinational corporations who seek to control the world-wide Internet, much like the WTO currently controls world-wide Trade. In fact, they are both based on the same model. The witnesses at tomorrow's hearing include Mike Roberts, ICANN president and one of the insiders who has controlled the organization since its inception. Opposite Mike is Karl Auerbach, the North American At-Large Director recently elected in the world's first global election. Karl is a strong critic of the ICANN takeover, especially the recent changes in decision making within the ICANN Board. Since the election, almost all decisions are now being made by an "executive committee," a subset of the ICANN board designed to keep the new Directors out of the process. Expect *fireworks* at tomorrow's sessions!!! Last week, the House held similar hearings. http://www.house.gov/commerce/hearings/telecom02082001.htm Here are some memorable quotes from that one: "[ICANN] appears to be accountable to no one except perhaps God Almighty." -- Dingell "Events at the Vatican are shrouded in less mystery than the process by which ICANN chooses TLDs" -- Markey "ICANN has the authority to set public policy for the Internet, and it's got a history of perhaps trying to overstep that power." -- Sheffield To learn more about last week's hearings, see also: ICANN Under Attack (Network World Fusion) http://tm0.com/thestandard/sbct.cgi?s=64386407i=301965d=1009354 U.S. Lawyers Criticize ICANN (Reuters) http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,41699,00.html ICANN Chairman Responds To House Charges http://www.internetnews.com/isp-news/article/1,2171,8_583731,00.html Cerf's Up! Congress Grills ICANN Chair on Domain Names http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2683840,00.html Domain Name Selection Process Under Fire http://www.msnbc.com/news/528384.asp +++ Jay Fenello http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "All I say is by way of discourse, and nothing by way of advice. I should not speak so boldly if it were my due to be believed" -- Montaigne +++ This message is from the "Aligning With Purpose Discussion" list. Please send subcribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +++ Jay Fenello http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "All I say is by way of discourse, and nothing by way of advice. I should not speak so boldly if it were my due to be believed" -- Montaigne
