On Mar 6, 2007, at 1:39 PM, Jeff Young wrote:
For better or worse, the centralized means of control you mention
may well come in the form of the latest IPTV networks being built
by large telco providers. As telco battles cable for couch
potatoes, they've realized that mucking with
While I agree with Brian that the enterprise draft will be difficult, I also
believe the SOHO one will be virtually impossible to get agreement over. The
issue is that most ISP's don't yet get the point that the device needs to be
dual managed, because they are still in the mindset that there
that's the Westin Bayshore (aka Westin Picadilly), as opposed to the
Westin Grand or the Westin Capital, right?
On Mar 5, 2007, at 2:42 PM, IETF Administrative Director wrote:
The IETF is pleased to announce its meeting locations for IETF's 70
and
73, and they are locations we have been to
Fred Baker wrote:
that's the Westin Bayshore (aka Westin Picadilly), as opposed to the
Westin Grand or the Westin Capital, right?
Yes, the Westin Bayshore.
Ray
On Mar 5, 2007, at 2:42 PM, IETF Administrative Director wrote:
The IETF is pleased to announce its meeting locations for
Hi,
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Geoff Mulligan wrote:
You question about switches does point to an overloaded term. In that
particular paragraph the switches we are talking about are electrical
switches, as in light switches, not network switches. We'll fix the
wording.
I guessed as much, which is
is a crisis to force action. That will occur sometime after
2010 when they need more than they already have and find that
the lease price per IPv4 address per day has been moving up
from its current averages of $1/day or $5/day depending on
contract length (a price service providers seem
Hi folks,
North America changes to Daylight Savings Time this weekend 10/11 March.
Europe changes two weeks later, 24/25 March, immediately after the IETF.
This has consequences.
1. During those two weeks, the time difference between North America
and Europe will be one hour less than usual.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
is a crisis to force action. That will occur sometime after
2010 when they need more than they already have and find that
the lease price per IPv4 address per day has been moving up
from its current averages of $1/day or $5/day depending on
contract length (a price
(off list)
--On Tuesday, 06 March, 2007 15:46 -0800 Tony Hain
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While I agree with Brian that the enterprise draft will be
difficult, I also believe the SOHO one will be virtually
impossible to get agreement over.
I agree, although I think we might disagree a bit about
--On Wednesday, 07 March, 2007 09:55 + [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
...
Also, even though there are only 3 years supply left in IANA,
to date none of the RIRs have changed their allocation policies
to deal with wind-down of IPv4 space or scarcity. Certainly
in some regions, there is the
I will attest to Prague being survivable. I have been there once
already and suffered no ill effects and was not robbed. I.e., don't
panic.
Location for location, the IETF (only) goes to the tamest and most
accessible places in the world. Compare it to other Internet
organizations.
At
I agree with John's analysis of the constraints here.
It may be possible to get the ISPs to move on the expectation that if they do
nothing government coertion will follow. The caveat here being that the
pressure the vendors are most likely to be responsive to would be from the US
and it is
Hi, folks. The following last call comment was received and based on
discussion the draft was updated. This comment never seems to have
made it to the ietf list though.
The following text was added to address the comment. Please confirm
that this text addresses the comment and that from the
On 2007-03-07 16:58, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
I have been to Prague 3 times in the last 5 years. It is quite survivable.
However, the taxi's are ... unregulated. I would suggest that IETFers
never take a cab on
the street. You may pay 50 Euros to go 1 km. Get the hotel, store,
restaurant,
--On Wednesday, 07 March, 2007 10:54 -0500 Edward Lewis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will attest to Prague being survivable. I have been there
once already and suffered no ill effects and was not robbed.
I.e., don't panic.
Location for location, the IETF (only) goes to the tamest and
most
--On Wednesday, 07 March, 2007 08:07 -0800 Hallam-Baker,
Phillip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with John's analysis of the constraints here.
[skipping the conjectures about US politics -- it is a much
longer discussion that isn't clearly suitable for the IETF list]
The ISPs face costs
Edward Lewis wrote:
I will attest to Prague being survivable. I have been there once
already and suffered no ill effects and was not robbed. I.e., don't panic.
...
At 14:52 -0500 3/6/07...:
...
Under the entry for taxis from the airport they say Warning:
Prague's taxi drivers ...
When
(i) there is every reason to expect a run on remaining
addresses at some point, whether induced by public
coverage, larcenous providers, ISP or RIR anxieties,
or something else.
In other words HIGH PUBLIC PROFILE. Interestingly, this roughly
coincides with increased
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.
These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security
area directors. Document editors should treat these comments just like
any other last
I visited Prague about two years ago and had the same experience as Ed. I
traveled via the Metro and on foot, visited all the tourist traps; had no
problems and never felt unsafe.
- Ralph
On 3/7/07 10:54 AM, Edward Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will attest to Prague being survivable. I
You can arrange a taxi pick up at the airport directly with the Hilton
(Hilton taxi driver will be waiting in the arrivals hall right behind
the customs holding a sign with your name and Hilton Logo). Cost for
taxi (CZK 750, EUR 25) can be posted to your hotel account.
Jerry
-Original
Hi,
I travelled to Prague after the Vienna IETF in 2003.
It's a city; you need to take city precautions.
There are signs of poverty, mostly outside the city center. I was
surprised when I arrived (by train) by people aggressively trying to
rent me a room in their house, and by taxi drivers who
Just to add to Dave's comments: The information provided needs to be
based on reality rather than hyperbole. A bunch of us just returned
from Bali which according to the US State Department is a place you
should not even think about visiting, and required Senior VP approval
to go. Yet, I am
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Wednesday, 07 March, 2007 10:54 -0500 Edward Lewis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will attest to Prague being survivable. I have been there
once already and suffered no ill effects and was not robbed.
I.e., don't panic.
Location for location, the
I have some basic observations:
- for non North-American, that's too many IETF meetings in North
America. The IETF should have a fallback in other places than North
American
- for non North-Americans, there are different criterias for defining
what normality is (I ACK Dave on the other thread
From: John C Klensin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
And, when I conclude that IPv6 is inevitable
(unless someone comes up with another scheme for global
unique addresses RSN),
Here we disagree, I don't think that IPv6 is inevitable. When I model the
pressures on the various parties in the
Hi Sam,
Thanks for the update. My original comment never made it to the ietf
list because I wasn't a member at the time of posting. I was informed that
if the moderator approved my posting it would be sent to the list,
unfortunately it wasn't. :-(
In the new Peer and authenticator
The idea that the US is not affected by IPv4 address space exhaustion is a
canard. The US runs out of addresses the same day as everywhere else.
US organizations are certainly over-represented in the list of organizations
holding underutilized IPv4 address blocks. But the fact that MIT has net
For those of you with experience in Prague/Czech Republic-
How practical is it to rent a car?
There are a couple of places outside Prague I would like to visit on the
weekend (in particular the JAWA Motorcycle Museum of Konopiště, about 20
miles outside Prague), and I am considering renting a
Dan, again, with the text as it stands, what attacks do you see
permitted by these requirements that you believe should not be
permitted.
The text changes you proposed were considered but are rather
problematic for existing protocols. I don't think we mind mandating
changing protocols for real
Eliot Lear wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
is a crisis to force action. That will occur sometime after
2010 when they need more than they already have and find that
the lease price per IPv4 address per day has been moving up
from its current averages of $1/day or $5/day depending on
JFC Morfin wrote:
Dear Phillip,
I do not think USA will have any say into this. For several reasons.
They are the last to be harmed by IPv4 addresses shortage and most
probably the home of the addressquatters.
This is BS that just has to stop. The ARIN region continues to burn through
~30%
On Mar 7, 2007, at 9:01 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
It is true that I tend to be pessimistic about changes to deployed
applications that can't be sold in terms of clear value. I'm
also negative about changing the architecture to accommodate short-
term problems. As examples of the latter,
On Mar 7, 2007, at 11:38 AM, Elwyn Davies wrote:
Also this appears to be tied to the US business model where the ISP
supplies you with the box and you don't get to change it (or even
own it).
Do they do that in the US? I'm not aware of it...
Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
From: John C Klensin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
And, when I conclude that IPv6 is inevitable (unless someone comes
up with another scheme for global unique addresses RSN),
Here we disagree, I don't think that IPv6 is inevitable.
When I model the pressures on
Doug makes a critical point here:
In order to successfully make a technology transition at the IP layer we have
to change the way in which we use the DNS layer.
Another way to look at the routing problems exposed by NAT is that they are the
result of relying on the IP layer for signalling
Hi Sam,
Many thanks for the opportunity to comment on the proposed text before
approval.
I do have concerns with the proposed text. Some of the new requirements
are overly burdensome. In other places, it is not clear what is expected.
Some notes below:
Sam Hartman wrote:
Hi, folks.
Here I was thinking that the DNS needs to be an useful name lookup service
for the Internet to function, and now PHB tells me it's a signalling layer.
Either I have seriously misunderstood the nature of signalling, seriously
misunderstood the nature of the DNS, or I have reason to dislike this
On Mar 7, 2007, at 3:00 PM, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
Here I was thinking that the DNS needs to be an useful name lookup
service for the Internet to function, and now PHB tells me it's a
signalling layer.
Either I have seriously misunderstood the nature of signalling,
seriously
Quite, the dissappearance of un-NATed IPv4 is inevitable.
Regretably the ready availability of IPv6 is not.
There are two possible future outcomes here. The first is that the only widely
available option is NAT-ed IPv4. The second is a dual stack offering that
combines NAT-ed IPv4 with full
On Wednesday, March 07, 2007 04:23:20 PM -0800 Hallam-Baker, Phillip
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We do need to revise the architecture description. Using IP addresses as
implicit signalling
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Another instance that
OK I will restate.
All connection initiation should be exclusively mediated through the DNS and
only the DNS.
The reason I introduced the term signalling was precisely because setting up a
connection today involves more than naming. Saying that the DNS should be the
exclusive naming
Wildcards are not permitted in the new Extended Validation certificates.
-Original Message-
From: Jeffrey Hutzelman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 7:59 PM
To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip; ietf@ietf.org
Cc: Jeffrey Hutzelman
Subject: RE: NATs as firewalls
Sam,
The problem I see is that when AAA is used as a key distribution
protocol there are 3 parties involved (peer, AAA server and authenticator)
and it's a 2 party model. For existing protocols-- the peer is speaking
to a NAS and the NAS obtains a key for the peer from the AAA server-- the
On Thu, 8 Mar 2007, Darryl (Dassa) Lynch wrote:
Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
From: John C Klensin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
There is a major difference between a NAT box plugged into
the real Internet and a NAT box plugged into another NAT
box. It is a pretty ugly one for the
On Thu, 8 Mar 2007, Darryl (Dassa) Lynch wrote:
Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
From: John C Klensin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
There is a major difference between a NAT box plugged into
the real Internet and a NAT box plugged into another NAT
box. It is a pretty ugly one for the
--On Wednesday, 07 March, 2007 10:14 -0800 Hallam-Baker,
Phillip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
IPv6 is not inevitable, the issue is how to make it so. I
believe that we need a branding scheme that tells the user
that they are getting a next generation Internet hookup, that
they have a next
Since there is no binding of identities it allows an
authenticator to say give me the key for authenticator FOO
even though it is actually authenticator BAR. For instance
the NAS-Id is put into a RADIUS request to ask for a specific
key and the key is sent back protected by the shared
If you have a 3 party key distribution scheme and at the
end of it the 3 parties do not share ALL THE SAME STATE yet
believe the protocol has successfully completed then your
key distribution scheme is flawed.
Dan.
On Wed, March 7, 2007 8:32 pm, Narayanan, Vidya wrote:
Since there is no
--On 7. mars 2007 17:06 -0800 Hallam-Baker, Phillip [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
OK I will restate.
All connection initiation should be exclusively mediated through the DNS
and only the DNS.
OK, I'll restate too.
In my opinion, we should never introduce any function that involves the DNS
On Mar 7, 2007, at 7:58 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
the taxi's are ... unregulated. I would suggest that IETFers never
take a cab on the street. You may pay 50 Euros to go 1 km. Get the
hotel, store, restaurant, whatever, where you are to order you a
cab, and you won't have problems. This
Dan Harkins wrote:
Sam,
But for things like HOKEY or 802.11r they want to have the AAA server
create a key hierarchy rooted off the EMSK or the MSK, respectively, that
contains keys for specific authenticators. These keys are going to be
distributed using AAA (that seems to be the
On Mar 7, 2007, at 3:57 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:
I think we should boldly go where no IETF has gone before (but
millions of other people have, safely).
I'll agree if I can change the phrase ever so slightly.
I would like to see the IETF meet where IETF participants live. Over
time, I would
I haven't been following this discussion closely, but in case nobody
else has made the point: the bad news is that the Prague taxi-driver
community is (in my personal experience) crooked, while on the other
hand Prague public transit is quite efficient. Last time I was there
I arrived late and
Hi Lakshminath,
That's not entirely correct. As I recently stated to your
colleage if a 3 party key distribution scheme finishes and
all 3 parties think it finished successfully but they do not
agree on all state then the scheme is flawed.
I see the path you're trying to go down-- add a
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'TCP Extended Statistics MIB '
draft-ietf-tsvwg-tcp-mib-extension-15.txt as a Proposed Standard
This document is the product of the Transport Area Working Group Working
Group.
The IESG contact persons are Lars Eggert and Magnus Westerlund.
A
The IAB is ready to ask the RFC-Editor to publish
Report from the IAB Workshop on Routing and Addressing
draft-iab-raws-report-01.txt
as an Informational RFC. This document is a report
from an invitational workshop convened by the IAB.
As such, it represents the
57 matches
Mail list logo
