Re: [Ietf-dkim] RFC 8463: DNS textual form underspecified

It appears that Steffen Nurpmeso said: > |I realize that RFC 8463 says repeatedly that the base64-encoded > |representation of an ED25519 key is 44 bytes, and that the > |examples go for this. Still there is no wording that the entire > |ASN.1 structure shall be thrown away. Yeah, I should

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Fwd: Re: [..] Recommendation for dkim signing

It appears that Scott Kitterman said: >This isn't horrible. The main reason for RFC 8463 was, in my view, as a hedge >for some discovery that suddenly made RSA >obsolete, which hasn't happened yet. From a standards perspective, it is >there if needed. Yes, that is exactly the reason I wrote

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Headers that should not be automatically oversigned in a DKIM signature?

It appears that Murray S. Kucherawy said: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 1:39 PM Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: > >> If a graphical user interface gives you a green "ok" button to >> click, or "red" otherwise, that is even better as in browser URL >> lines. Then pop up a tree-view of message

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Security indicators, not Headers that should not be automatically oversigned

It appears that Jim Fenton said: >On 5 Feb 2024, at 14:02, Dave Crocker wrote: > >> On 2/5/2024 1:56 PM, Jim Fenton wrote: >>> And you will also provide citations to refereed research about what you >>> just asserted as well, yes? >> >> >> Ahh, you want me to prove the negative. That's not

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Question about lone CR / LF

It appears that Dave Crocker said: >> Any DKIM signer or verifier already has a state machine looking for CR >> and LF to do header or body canonicalization.  When the state machine >> runs into a bare CR or LF, it has to do something. The only options >> are to produce a wrong result, since

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Question about lone CR / LF

It appears that Dave Crocker said: >The prohibition is not in DKIM. So the violation is not within DKIM.  >And why should DKIM care? RFC 6376 says what to do with 5322 messages. It says nothing about what to do with blobs of bytes that are sort of like but not quite 5322 messages. It even has

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Question about lone CR / LF

It appears that Murray S. Kucherawy said: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 5:44 PM Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: > >> But i cannot read this from RFC 6376. > >Sections 2.8 and 3.4.4 don't answer this? Not really. They say what to do with CRLF but not with a lone CR or lone LF. RFC5322 says:

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Headers that should not be automatically oversigned in a DKIM signature?

It appears that Evan Burke said: >> Insisting on using the same term for these two different cases has an >> academic purity to it, but has already been demonstrated to be destructive >> in practical terms, because it creates confused discussion. >No, that's exactly backwards. The oversigning

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Headers that should not be automatically oversigned in a DKIM signature?

It appears that Mike Hillyer said: >In the interest of the rule of unforseen consequences, we're trying to avoid >oversigning any headers that would break further downstream processing. Does >anyone >know of any headers that *should* be DKIM signed, but *should not* be >oversigned? Offhand,

Re: [Ietf-dkim] DKIM Signature

It appears that Scott Kitterman said: >On October 27, 2023 2:56:30 PM UTC, "Murray S. Kucherawy" > wrote: >>On Sun, Oct 1, 2023 at 1:50 AM Jan Dušátko >>wrote: >> >>> I would like to ask to consider the possibility of defining a DKIM >>> signature using Ed448. [...] >My view is that more

Re: [ietf-privacy] [Internet Policy] How a Radio Shack Robbery Could Spur a New Era in Digital Privacy

In article you write: >So, it seems like (IANAL) one way to read the situation is that the government >is currently trying to >get companies to forcefully take the expectation of privacy off the table for >commonly used >communication tools. I

Re: [ietf-privacy] Fwd: [Internet Policy] How a Radio Shack Robbery Could Spur a New Era in Digital Privacy

In article <396e100a-55ba-4155-a29e-92d452a45...@gmail.com> you write: >Interesting article, cross-posted from ISOC Public Policy list Carpenter is an interesting case, but it has nothing to do with the Internet. It's quite fact specific to mobile phones, which by their nature transmit a running

Re: The core Internet institutions abandon the US Government

Just few quick questions, In what part of Fadi Chehad� mandate at ICANN this falls ? And who sanctified him as representative of the Internet Community ? He is just an employee of ICANN and these actions go way beyond ICANN's mission and responsibilities. ICANN has a long running fantasy that

Re: consensus, was leader statements

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Because we've got more than 120 working groups, thousands of participants, and the internet is now part of the world's communications infrastructure. I don't like hierarchy but I don't know how to scale up the organization without it. There are

Re: Last Call: Change the status of ADSP (RFC 5617) to Internet Standard

of the authors of this RFC and support the change. ADSP was basically an experiment that failed. It has no significant deployment, and the problem it was supposed to solve is now being addressed in other ways. Regards, John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Please

Re: Dotless in draft-ietf-homenet-arch-10

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In article 6.2.5.6.2.20130920070952.0664d...@elandnews.com you write: Hi Spencer, I read your DISCUSS about draft-ietf-homenet-arch-10: 'Is there a useful reference that could be provided for dotless?' Another possibility is

Re: ORCID - unique identifiers for contributors

I would even suggest that all I-D authors, at the very least, should need to register with the IETF to submit documents. Oddly enough, back in the Dark Ages (i.e. the ARPANET), the DDN maintained such a registry, and so if you Google 'NC3 ARPANET' you will see that that was the ID

Re: ORCID - unique identifiers for contributors

There are, in the RfC I used as an example, far more acknowledged contributors, than authors. No addresses for those contributors are given. As far as I can tell, nobody else considers that to be a problem. I have written a bunch of books and looked at a lot of bibliographic records, and I have

Re: ORCID - unique identifiers for contributors

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Asking for ORCID support in the tool set and asking for IETF endorsement are two very different things. Having tool support for it is a necessary first step to permitting IETF contributors to gain experience with it. We need that experience before

Re: ORCID - unique identifiers for contributors

Having an IETF identity is OK if all you ever publish is in the IETF. Some of our participants also publish at other SDOs such as IEEE, W3C, ITU, and quite a few publish Academic papers. Using the same identifier for all these places would be useful, and that single identifier is not going to

Re: [IETF] Re: ORCID - unique identifiers for contributors

It's practically essential for academics whose career depends on attribution of publications and on citation counts (and for the people who hire or promote them). Gee, several of the other John Levines have published way more than I have. If what we want is citation counts, confuse away. R's,

Re: ORCID - unique identifiers for bibliographers

, a psychiatrist in Cambridge MA, a composer in Cambridge UK, a car buyer in Phoenix, and some random guy in Brooklyn, all of whom happen to be named John Levine. Tough. Not my problem. I also think that it's time for people to get over the someone might spam me so I'm going to hide nonsense

Re: ORCID - unique identifiers for bibliographers

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Since this has turned out to be ambiguous, I have decided to instead use a SHA-256 hash of my DNA sequence: 9f00a4-9d1379-002a03-007184-905f6f-796534-06f9da-304b11-0f88d7-92192e-98b2 How does your identical twin brother feel about this? -BEGIN

Re: ORCID - unique identifiers for contributors

How do I know that the sender of this message actually has the right to claim the ORCID in question (-0001-5882-6823)? The web page doesn't present anything (such as a public key) that could be used for authentication. I dunno. How do we know who brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com is? I can tell

Re: pgp signing in van

Why do you think that cryptographic doubt = legal doubt? I've heard that claim many times, but I've never heard an argument for it. Having attempted to explain technology in court as an expert witness, I find the assertion risible. R's, John

Re: not really pgp signing in van

Yes, they should have made that impossible. Oh my, I _love_ this! This is actually the first non-covert use case I've heard described, although I'm not convinced that PGP could actually do this without message format tweaks. Sounds like we're on our way to reinventing S/MIME. Other than

Re: not really pgp signing in van

Sounds like we're on our way to reinventing S/MIME. Other than the key signing and distribution (which I agree is a major can of worms) it works remarkably well. Which sounds kind of like, Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play? Yes, and no. PGP and S/MIME each have their own key

Re: What real users think [was: Re: pgp signing in van]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Believe it or not Ted Nelson had a similar idea when he invented Xanadu Hypertext. He was obsessed by copyright and the notion that it would be wrong to copy someone else's text to another machine, hence the need for links. Well, yes, but he's never

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard

out. Regards, John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly

Re: [spfbis] Last Call: draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard

SPF is ten years old now. It would be helpful if you could give us a list of other protocols that have had a similar issue with a TXT record at the apex during the past decade. I don't know of any (at least ones that are used in the global dns namespace), and I would like to still not know of

Re: Fwd: [dnsext] SPF isn't going to change, was Deprecating SPF

Nobody has argued that SPF usage is zero, and the reasons for deprecating SPF have been described repeatedly here and on the ietf list, so this exercise seems fairly pointless. the reasons for not deprecating SPF have been described here and on the ietf list repeatedly ... yet

Re: IETF 88 - Registration Now Open!

In article b4828b8f-b900-4dc1-ad3e-7e3044fb8...@isi.edu you write: and the hotel is fully booked�. Not if you use the link on the meeting hotel page. http://www.ietf.org/meeting/88/hotel.html R's, John

Re: [spfbis] Last Call: draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard

In article 5215cd8d.3080...@sidn.nl you write: So what makes you think the above 4 points will not be a problem for the next protocol that comes along and needs (apex) RR data? And the one after that? SPF is ten years old now. It would be helpful if you could give us a list of other protocols

Re: [spfbis] there is no transitiion, was Last Call: draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt

Actually, I just checked. Right now, none of them seem to publish SPF RRtype records. Yahoo doesn't even publish a TXT record containing SPF information. An argument could be made that if we really wanted to push the adoption of SPF RRtypes, getting Google, Yahoo and Hotmail to publish SPF

Re: [spfbis] prefixed names, was Last Call: draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt

Newsgroups: iecc.lists.ietf.ietf From: John Levine jo...@iecc.com Subject: Re: [spfbis] prefixed names, was Last Call: draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt Summary: Expires: References: 5212fcef.80...@dcrocker.net 55459829-933f-4157-893a-f90552d44...@frobbit.se 5213174d.7080...@dcrocker.net

Re: [spfbis] Last Call: draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard

* The charter disallows major protocol changes -- removing the SPF RR type is a direct charter violation; since SPF is being used on the Internet. ... Uh huh. $ dig besserwisser.org txt ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;besserwisser.org. IN TXT ;; ANSWER SECTION: besserwisser.org.

Re: [spfbis] Last Call: draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard

There is nothing syntactially worng with those entries. I congratulate people advocating SPF in TXT records while also writing parsers. None of your TXT records are SPF records because they don't start with the required version tag. You have two type 99 records that start with the version tag,

Re: [spfbis] Last Call: draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard

AFAICT, no one is arguing that overloading TXT in the way recommended by this draft is a good idea, rather the best arguments appear to be that it is a pragmatic least bad solution to the fact that (a) people often implement (poorly) the very least they can get away with and (b) it can take a

Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)

In article 01672754-1c4f-465b-b737-7e82dc5b3...@oracle.com you write: I've been told, though obviously I don't know, that the costs are proportional. I assume it's not literally a if we get one additional person, it costs an additional $500. But I assume SM wasn't proposing to get just one or

Re: Anyone having trouble submitting I-Ds?

The anti-hijacking feature causes the confirmation email to only go to the authors listed on the previous version of the document, so mail was not sent to me and things are working as expected. This behavior is not documented to the user when they submit the document and is therefore a bug.

Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher

http://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/RPC-Proposed-SoW-2013-final.doc I know that I should not this, but... I am a bit surprised (disappointed) in seeing a proprietary format used here. I am not saying that you should not use the Office suite to write it, but you could convert it to PDF (better,

Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher

I wonder, though, if this document might have contained change bars that nobody but people who use MS Word would see. Opening the document up in Preview on the Mac, it's just four or five pages of text, with no way to evaluate what changed. It looks fine in OpenOffice. Really. I agree with

Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues

We have recently been asked permission to republish the TAO with a creative commons license, but according to counsel, the current trust agreement does not give the trustees the rights to do this. - Without specific language being added to the trust agreement, we cannot grant these types of

Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues

Actually, verbatim translations are already allowed under the existing IETF document license. It's other modifications that are not allowed under IETF, but which CC-BY would permit. That sounds right. Someone might want to add commentary (even in English) to the Tao, such as to discuss local

Re: Speaking of VAT

My understanding is that Germany has reciprocal VAT agreements with a bunch of countries so if your employer is in one of those countries it may be able to reclaim, but since the US isn't one of them I haven't looked in detail. John VAT is a European Union tax that all member states are

Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility

Ironically, this IETF everyone who stayed at the Intercontinental was walking around with an RFID key in their pocket the whole meeting. How many of us put them in faraday cages? I put all of my cards in a faraday cage, but perhaps that's just me, and because I carry an RFID passport card.

Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again

Agreed. One minor downside was needing an additional flight. It seems AB who handles about a third of the traffic rather than Lufthansa that handles about one fifth, was not the best choice where a 6 hour layover extended an hour on the tarmac in a hot plane. With any luck, the next time we

Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility

In article m2li4ew2nk.wl%ra...@psg.com you write: Ironically, this IETF everyone who stayed at the Intercontinental was walking around with an RFID key in their pocket the whole meeting. How many of us put them in faraday cages? one. i made it a habit Two. I have a wallet with a built-in

Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@ietf.org)

If there is a serious drive to discontinue the weekly posting summary - I strongly object. As far as I can tell, one person objects, everyone else thinks it's fine. Seems like rough consensus to me. R's, John

Speaking of VAT

At last week's very successful Berlin meeting, the finances were thrown of whack by the late discovery that the IETF had to pay 19% German VAT on the registration fee. At the IAOC session they said that about half of that is likely to be reclaimed from VAT paid, but the net amount is still a

Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again

Venue was great, food options here and in the city were great, all-around great experience. Let's come again! Agreed. Great meeting overall, venue worked well, plenty of places to eat and stay within reasonable distance, and suitable distractions for those half days when you don't have any

Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again

-1 on doing it during the winter speaking as a Californian who doesn't even own a winter coat I expect you could get a very nice one at KaDeWe.

Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again

In article 6462.1375450...@sandelman.ca you write: -=-=-=-=-=- Many countries let you claim VAT paid as you leave. Only on goods you export, not on hotels and meals. I hope the IETF can figure out how to more efficiently reclaim the VAT it pays on European expenses so the whole thing is a

Re: where's the data, was IAB Statement on Dotless Domains

In article 51e368f9.70...@dougbarton.us you write: On 07/12/2013 02:40 PM, John R Levine wrote: Point your browser at http://dk/ or http://tm/ and see what happens. As John points out, the ccTLDs are already doing this. ICANN has no authority to tell the ccTLDs NOT to do it, thus restricting

Re: IAB Statement on Dotless Domains

I guess I'm missing something. How exactly is having a gTLD going to bring in the Big Bucks? Do people actually type addresses into the address bars on their browsers any more, or do they just type what they're looking for into the search bar? Let's just say you're not allowed to ask that

Re: IAB Statement on Dotless Domains

domains are going to be dotless and three of the biggest dotless domains are going to be called .apple and .microsoft and .google and they are going I've read the applications for .apple, .microsoft, and .google. None of them propose to use dotless names, only the usual 2LDs. At this pont

Re: IETF 87 Registration Suspended

It seems that the rules might be somewhat similar all over europe: http://www.tmf-vat.com/vat/german-vat.html You would think so, which leads to the question about what's different in Berlin from Paris and Prague and Maastricht. R's, John

submission tool not sending confirmations ?

I'm trying to submit and I-D, and I'm not getting the usual confirmation mail. My mail logs show nothing, no attempts, no failures. It worked the last time I tried it on Sunday. (Yes, I gave it a working address.) Anyone else seeing this? R's, John

Re: Comments For I-D: draft-moonesamy-nomcom-eligibility-00 (was Re: The Nominating Committee Process: Eligibility)

In article 51cf38eb.3080...@dougbarton.us you write: On 06/29/2013 05:28 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: From: j...@mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Yet. PS: I probably should have added a :-) to that. Sorry, it's early, the brain's not firing on all cylinders yet, and I was so

Re: IETF, ICANN and non-standards

I think this is the correct strategy, BUT, I see as a very active participant in ICANN (chair of SSAC) that work in ICANN could be easier if some more technical standards where developed in IETF, and moved forward along standards track, that ICANN can reference. As a concrete example, the EPP

Re: Content-free Last Call comments

So, if wg discussion has been ordered mute by the wg chairs because some wg participants believe the group-think consensus is good enough, can those objections again be raised in IETF LC or are they set in stone? If that were ever to happen, I don't see why not. In the recent cases I've seen

Re: financial fun with an IETF Meeting in South America

The move appears to be related to new, restrictive regulations the Argentine government has imposed on currency exchanges.' According to the Telegraph, 'The new regulations required anyone wanting to change Argentine pesos into another currency to submit an online request for permission

Issues in wider geographic participation

I think this is a summary of the issues people have mentioned that discourage participation from LDCs, in rough order of importance. * People aren't aware the IETF exists, or what it does, or that it has an open participation model * People don't read and write English well enough to be

Re: IETF Meeting in North America

Feh. There is no winter in Vancouver. On the other hand there are salmon and steelhead. I distinctly remember a meeting in Vancouver where certain attendees were complaining about the winter weather, with temperatures plunging below zero* and snow drifting 1 to 2*. The specific complaint was

Re: IETF Meeting in South America

My question is about whether we would be there during the peak season, and when exactly is that season? I gather you're in Ottawa. Here's Air Canada's calendar rules for their lowest fare to EZE: ORIGINATING CANADA - PERMITTED 01JAN THROUGH 08JUL OR 06AUG THROUGH 16SEP OR 01OCT

Re: IETF Meeting in South America

I suspect that if the meeting is approved, the food in Buenos Aires will be more interesting than it was in Adelaide, at least for many of us. The locals speaking English might also be more understandable. :-) If you like steak or pizza and lots of pretty good red wine, the food in Buenos

Re: IETF Meeting in South America

On May 23, 2013, at 7:44 PM, Melinda Shore melinda.sh...@gmail.com wrote: So the question is why we aren't seeing more drafts, reviews, and discussions from people in Central and South America, Language? Possibly, but we get quite a lot from parts of Asia where I'd think the language issue

Re: Last Call: Change the status of DKIM (RFC 6376) to Internet Standard

. Regards, John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly

What's a reasonable and non-discriminatory patent license?

-motorola.html -- Regards, John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly

Re: Sufficient email authentication requirements for IPv6

There seems to be a faction that feel that 15 years ago someone once blacklisted them and caused them some inconvenience, therefore all DNSBLs suck forever. I could say similar things about buggy PC implementations of TCP/IP, but I think a few things have changed since then, in both cases.

Re: Sufficient email authentication requirements for IPv6

Quoting Nathaniel Borenstein [1]: One man's blacklist is another's denial-of-service attack. Email reputation services have a bad reputation. They have a good enough reputation that every non-trivial mail system in the world uses them. They're not all the same, and a Darwinian process has

Re: [IETF] Comments for Humorous RFCs or uncategorised RFCs or dated April the first

That said, I did at one point have to exercise my diplomatic skills when I got forwarded a customer (nameless here for evermore) question about whether support for RFC 3514 was on our roadmap. Think of it as free market intelligence on your customer base. Of course we've only had April 1 RFCs

Re: Sufficient email authentication requirements for IPv6

In practice, the /64 prefix of the IPv6 address has very much the same administrative properties as the /32 value of the IPv4 address. You would hope so, but I know hosting places that give their customers a /128 in a shared /64. They claim that their routers make this hard to fix. I don't know

Re: Sufficient email authentication requirements for IPv6

As a result, it is questionable whether any IPv6 address-based reputation system can be successful (at least those based on voluntary principles.) It can probably work for whitelisting well behaved senders, give or take the DNS cache busting issues of IPv6 per-message lookups. Since a bad guy

Re: Getting rid of the dot

In article 51489888.6050...@internet2.edu you write: I want my badge to have my name and a small screen showing the room I just came from. I want the screen to show the room I'm going to next. And it should be upside down so I can read it.

Re: Getting rid of the dot

In article 5148d415.1000...@internet2.edu you write: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/19/13 20:38, Michael Richardson allegedly wrote: Actually, I'd just settle for a badge that wasn't always backwards. It costs a lot more to get lanyards that attach at two corners. If our

Re: raw meeting minutes (Re: meetecho praise)

It would also allow some crows-sourcing of corrections and additions to the raw minutes... CAW CAW CAW CAW !!!

Re: Review: draft-iab-dns-applications-07

In article 5142fe8f.1020...@dcrocker.net you write: Review of:Architectural Considerations on Application Features in the DNS I-D: draft-iab-dns-applications-07 Reviewed by: D. Crocker I had similar comments to Dave's on earlier versions of this draft, and although

Re: Is there a Git repository of RFCs? Or of Internet-Drafts?

If the disk goes bad so as to provoke a misread of a sector, post write, the file is effectively corrupted. If this happens with git, the checksum calculated on write will fail to match, and the corruption is detected. If you're worried about that (not totally unreasonable on modern disks)

Re: fixing language in documents written by Martians and others

consuming if each iteration has to go from the editor to the author and back, If the document has a co-author who's working on it all along, the rewriting could happen as the document was developed, leaving only a final check for the copy editor. -- Regards, John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary

Re: [86all] Caribe Overbooking

8.10 Hotel Booked Beyond 100% Capacity. Hotel agrees not to relocate any conference attendee holding a guaranteed reservation only after it has relocated any other guests required to be relocated. I tried reading the sentence above several times and have concluded it isn't me -- it

Re: Diversity of IETF Leadership

- Each of the confirming bodies (the ISOC Board for the IAB, the IAB for the IESG, and the IESG for the IAOC) could make a public statement at the beginning of each year's nominations process that they will not confirm a slate unless it contributes to increased

Re: Time zones in IETF agenda

So I guess one still has to keep track of daylight savings. I've been trying to explain this to people for years, that I cannot tell when their meeting is if they will not tell me what time zone they're using. It turns out most people don't actually know what time zone they're using (no, San

Re: Time zones in IETF agenda

is much increased. Florida will be at UTC-4 (which we call EDT) as of early Sunday morning, so a meeting at noon in Florida any day of IETF 86 will be at 0800 UTC. -- Regards, John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Please consider the environment before reading

Re: Call for Comment: RFC Format Requirements and Future Development

There should be an immutable requirement that any alternative format MUST NOT increase the size by more than a factor of two compared to ASCII text. So you're saying you're unalterably opposed to the RFC editor providing PDF, HTML, epub, mobipocket, and every other format that people actually use

Re: [IETF] Internet Draft Final Submission Cut-Off Today

I'd be willing to deal with an embargo for draft-ietf-*, but don't see at all why it extends to other drafts. We have software. Embargo drafts for WGs that are actually meeting during the preceding week, leave the others alone.

Re: IPv6 update for BCP5?

On 1/27/13 10:07 AM, tglassey wrote: So... we probably need a IPv6 update for BCP5 (RFC1918), doesnt that make sense? My understanding is people have been using ULAs (RFC 4193) for this type of functionality. That's certainly one option. The other is just to apply for some IPv6 address space

Re: A modest proposal

Do none of you know what the phrase a modest proposal refers to? No, but I'm sure that this will be a Great Leap Forward.

Re: A modest proposal

Additionally, I can't understand why each line is terminated with CRLF, why use two characters when one will do. Microsoft-OS text editors. Seriously. My, what a bunch of parvenus. SIP got it from SMTP, SMTP got it from Telnet. Back in the 1960s we all used CRLF because on a mechanical model

Re: I'm struggling with 2219 language again

But some people feel we need a more formal specification language that goes beyond key point compliance or requirements definition, and some are using 2119 words in that role and like it. Having read specs like the Algol 68 report and ANSI X3.53-1976, the PL/I standard that's largely written

Re: travel guide for the next IETF...

Oh, if you were considering a visit to one of the nearby theme parks, check out their latest hi-tech innovation: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/07/business/media/at-disney-parks-a-bracelet-meant-to-build-loyalty-and-sales.html

Re: travel guide for the next IETF...

yeah, I know, but I gotta say to the IEEE SERIOUSLY? Apparently the IEEE folks love it, have been there before. Look at the reviews on Tripadvisor or Google, and for the most part they're quite positive. We're an odd group, much more price sensitive than most conventioneers, and way more

Re: travel guide for the next IETF...

So if you don't attend IEEE, quit your whining: at least you won't have to eat he same hotel food for 2 weeks in a row... You don't have to eat there. Check out the reviews of this restaurant across the street: https://plus.google.com/118141773512616354020/about

Re: travel guide for the next IETF...

Good... but how to get there? If you plan to do anything more than spend the whole trip at the meeting hotel, you need a car. Orlando is a cheap rental town, it's not hard to rent something for $100 total for five days. Cape Canaveral and Cocoa Beach are only an hour away for people who think

Re: A mailing list protocol

Is there an IETF standard format for handling inline quote replies? It's defined in the same RFC that specifies the setting of the Reply-To: header in mailing lists.

Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely literate minutes)

? :-( No, just hand out copies of this: http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/books_pp -- Regards, John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly

Re: Newcomers [Was: Evolutionizing the IETF]

Shall we move on? Sure. Since we agree that there is no way to pay for the extra costs involved in meeting in places where there are insignificant numbers of IETF participants, it won't happen, and we're done. That was simple, wasn't it?

Re: Newcomers [Was: Evolutionizing the IETF]

and willing to join IETF mailing lists, why does the location of the meeting matter? -- Regards, John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly

Re: how do Newcomers work in the IETF [Was: Evolutionizing

I find this logic circular. There is more participation from Americans (people from US) so more meetings are held there and so more people from US attend. Anyone in the world with an e-mail address can participate in and contribute to the IETF. I did stuff on mailing lists for years before I

Re: Newcomers [Was: Evolutionizing the IETF]

I don't think that thoes Canada and US participants are paying for the attendance, but their organisations, ... In many cases, you are mistaken.

  1   2   3   4   >