RE: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my!
The world connected Hmm Now I'm thinking Virus's /Jon/div -Original Message- From: Evstiounin, Mikhail [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 4:08 PM To: Steven Cotton; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my! Toaster is much more quite, even it takes more time. And all your mail will have brown-gold colour, while in blender you get everything mixed up:-) -Original Message- From: Steven Cotton [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 5:05 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my! On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Anthony Atkielski wrote: The mere fact that something is technically possible doesn't mean that it should be done. Definitely - what benefit can I get from my toaster having Internet conectivity when I will be able to use my blender to read mail? -- steven
RE: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my!
all we need is programmers that remember to actually CHECK that string lengths are in bounds. Lets hope they are X-Microsoft programmers, That should keep all us support staff busy and in secure jobs ;-) I know, Its Friday ! Jon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 5:35 PM To: Mahadevan Iyer Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my! On Fri, 04 Aug 2000 01:26:55 PDT, Mahadevan Iyer said: At first glance, it seems sheer idiocy to use an open network like the Internet to control critical matter-of-life-and-death public infrastructure like power systems. What do you think? At first glance, it seems sheer idiocy to use something like a telco switch to control critical matter-of-life-and-death public infrastructure like the US 911 system. Telco switches are hackable. And I submit to you that the 911 system is as life-and-death critical as it gets. Hasn't seemed to have been a problem so far, even though 911 systems *have* been hacked, subjected to denial of service attacks, and all the other problems they are subject to. Or do you think, it is possible to build ultra-reliable secure real-time communication channels in the Internet? Maybe.. It may be impossible to build ultra-reliable secure systems. On the other hand, remember that it's about *risk management*. Nuclear launch codes are one of the *very* few "zero failures acceptable" things we have. We accept that on the order of 1 out of every million airplane takeoffs ends badly. We accept that the power grid fails in scattered areas during the summer. We accept that doctors, drug interactions, and hospitals accidentally kill a number of patients every year. I don't see the whole class of Aleve/Naprosyn painkillers being pulled off the market, even though an amazing number of people die every year from gastric bleeding. We actually know almost all of what we need to build such systems. Now all we need is programmers that remember to actually CHECK that string lengths are in bounds. ;) Valdis Kletnieks Operating Systems Analyst Virginia Tech
RE: Heard at the IETF
Isn't that why PSION didn't make a Series 4 It went from 3C to 5? Apparently they sell a lot over in Japan ! /Jon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 2:42 PM To: John Day Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Heard at the IETF Don't the Japanese who avoid the use of 4 because it sounds like death? I could be wrong, but I seem to remember that. Also, I remember hearing that about the Japanese television show "Iron Chef". Although there are 4 Iron Chefs, the TV program only shows 3 at the most (at a time) to avoid showing or referring to all 4 of them. Sorry to interrupt your thread, but I found it a humorous sideline in an all too un-unhumorous (like that's a word) work week. :) Cheers! /rpg -- Randall Gale Regional Director - New England Information Security Predictive Systems vox: 781-751-9629 fax: 781-329-9343 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.predictive.com -- John Day [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/03/00 09:03 AM To: "Hans E. Kristiansen" [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Michael H. Warfield" [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Scott Lawrence" [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: Heard at the IETF At 3:40 PM +0800 8/3/00, Hans E. Kristiansen wrote: On Wed, Aug 02, 2000 at 03:58:47PM -0400, Scott Lawrence wrote: - elevators (in the US) go 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15... they skip 13! Does this make 14 a prime number ? ;-) No - it makes 26 a prime number. That's OK... But in China, they skip "4". (They really do). Because the idiogram for the number four sounds like "death", so it is for a good reason. Number 13 is just unlucky. Ahhh, right. Thanks for putting a scientific view on the subject. ;-)
RE: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my!
Err I think that would take some thinking about ? How many houses are there in the world! -Original Message- From: Rakers, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 2:41 PM To: 'Dennis Glatting'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my! When household appliances begin becoming IP addressable, I think we will see a move towards assigning an Internet IP address per household (much like today's street address). The household will perform NAT for all devices within (one street address can house many people, not just one). -Original Message- From: Dennis Glatting [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 8:32 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my! I've been thinking about the issue of ARIN fees from last night's plenary and arrived at two philosophical questions. I run my business out of my home and my DSL link is an important part of my business. About six months ago my ISP started charging me a $20/mo. fee for my /27 because "ARIN is now charging us." I am unhappy about this fee but I understand its motivation -- conversation of IP space, though I believe fees do not really effect the true wasters of this space and the fee, or as it is called in some circles, a tax, is probably misguided. Nonetheless, with IPv6, I naively hoped, until last night, the conservation of space issues would go away, and thus the fees. Big duh! If we look at today's marketing hype and think forward a bit there is a thrust to "Internet enable" appliances, such as dryers, ovens, and stereos. Assuming ARIN fees persist, my first philosophical question is whether any consumer of these appliances MUST periodically (e.g., monthly) drop coins in the ARIN fountain? Thinking laterally, the reserved port space (1024) is tight. Using the same IP space conversation logic, should fees be charged to conserve port space? If so, my second philosophiocal question is what is our role, as protocol designers and IETF volunteers, in creating, what is slowly becoming, an Internet consumption taxation model? Imagine for a moment the effect of a fee against the allocation or use of port 80 or 443, maybe even port 25 or 53.
RE: Heard at the IETF
How's about a set of buttons that just says High, higher, even higher etc etc ... Jon Where there is a will there is a way ;-) -Original Message- From: Fred Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 2:16 PM To: Dawson, Peter D Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Heard at the IETF At 07:58 PM 8/2/00 +, Dawson, Peter D wrote: -And of course, security folks want the buildings to be -O(2^1024) floors -high, so that we can see some *useful* primes... - - --Steve Bellovin of course, using the floor factors , as indicated... this will eliminate all possibilities of hackers getting into the elevator system.. correct ? no, they'll get into the elevator. This prevents them ever getting out again, as they will never be able to figure out what flaw is to exploit.
RE: Domain name organization recommendation
Hi there Its already set up link that, Not that I can ever recall seeing a .us. The example that you have used myco.mytown.mystate.us. is a trick on. It is in reality www.mystate.us the rest are virtual Server adress's (Sub domains) But yes from what I have seen the US tend to use .COM as default. Jon -Original Message- From: Andre-John Mas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 4:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Domain name organization recommendation Hi, I was wondering if anybody has written a documentation that examines the usability of national domain names and provides advice on what approaches are actually useable. For example, I recently had a discussion with some people on the .us domain on how unusable it is due to the length of the domain names - myco.mytown.mystate.us. How about having .com.us, .edu.us, and accepting that anything without a country extension is should now be reserved for international use, contrary to what the original RFC said on the use of the .com, .edu, .gov domain names. Andre
RE: Email Privacy eating software
"I use the computer to access the Internet, yes," I said, rather proud of myself for my accuracy. "Is there any pornography on it?" she said, stoically. I belive she ment the Computer not the Internet. -Original Message- From: John Stracke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 3:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Email Privacy eating software Matt Holdrege wrote: I'm not sure what "sounds a bit overmuch" to you. Have a look at http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid%5F15/150465.stm How is this different than looking in your bags for porn magazines or videotapes? How is looking at your stored email different than looking at your paper correspondence? Read it again--they were apparently going to use their program to view a known porn site, not porn on his hard drive. -- /==\ |John Stracke| http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own.| |Chief Scientist |=| |eCal Corp. |You buttered your bread, now lie in it. | |[EMAIL PROTECTED]| | \==/
RE: Email Privacy eating software
Well been British, we are to polite and would not like to make a fuss. :) -Original Message- From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 9:37 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Email Privacy eating software Jon Crowcroft wrote: yo udont know about RIP then if you visit the UK, and are asked to show any files on your computer, you cannot claim you "cannot remember the key" that wil lbe deemed evidence that you are witholding evidence and yo ucan go to jail jus for that.,. i.e. our new crypto-fascist law takes away the right to the presumption of innocence ratehr than guilt its like escrow only worse. the technology is irrelevant in the face of such blatant misuse of human rights. Well, the U.K. is supposed to be a democracy; why don't you just vote to get your rights restored?
RE: HTML forms
Thanks for the confirmation there Lloyd :) J. --- On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, James P. Salsman wrote: Anyone know whether Opera has microphone upload yet? More to the point, does anyone care? L. [EMAIL PROTECTED]PGPhttp://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/
RE: Email Privacy eating software
In the UK we have the same type of problem, this time from my Favorite Company MI5. 'The UK is leading the world when it comes to high-tech spying on its citizens' Please see http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_762000/762514.stm Lets face it, internet service providers will be forced to install black boxes in their data centres that connect directly to an MI5 monitoring centre in London. Now that would be nice to hack into. More to the point, Who is going to fund this? 'thinking' Oh yes thats why Petrol in the UK has now passed the £1.03 per litre barrier. 'http://www.rip-off.co.uk/fuel.htm' :-) -Original Message- From: Jon Crowcroft [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 12:03 PM To: Anthony Atkielski Cc: ietf Subject: Re: Email Privacy eating software In message 01dc01bfed78$0e7a55a0$0a0a@contactdish, Anthony Atkielski type d: I don't understand why the FBI feels that it needs to have a top-secret black box attached to the ISP's network. Why not just have the ISP provide a copy of all e-mail to or from the specified mailbox? wiretap is a weapon in the FBI's armoury in the US, YOU have the right to bear arms You should demand the constitutional right to wiretap the FBI and CIA and so on right now. that will fix things. j.
RE: Is WAP mobile Internet??
I disagree, WAP, Wireless Application Protocol, Its a way of transmitting data I.E. to and from the Web. How does this not fall under the Internet Umbrella ? Thanks Jon -Original Message- From: Ashutosh Agarwal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2000 2:25 PM To: 'Taylor, Johnny' Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: Is WAP mobile Internet?? Hi all, I fully agree with Lars. Even I believe WAP does not fall under the Internet Umbrella Ashutosh Agarwal e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Change your thoughts and you change your world. The Buddha -Original Message- From: Taylor, Johnny [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2000 12:15 AM To: Lars-Erik Jonsson; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Is WAP mobile Internet?? The Internet allows all protocols to in-operate with her. This is the uniqueness of the web. Therefore WAP falls within this area! -Original Message- From: Lars-Erik Jonsson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 7:54 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Is WAP mobile Internet?? Hi Folks!! I would like to hear your opinions about how WAP people often say that WAP is "mobile Internet". In my opinion, WAP is NOT mobile Internet at all. The Internet is built on the e2e principle and based on the Internet Protocols, which WAP is not. I can not tell people that they should not use WAP (even if I have my opinions about WAP). If they believe in WAP that is their problem, but when they try to use the words WAP and Internet in the same sentence I think it is time to clarify a few things. I accept that WAP is there, but be honest about what it is. Cheers! /Lars-Erik (expressing my PERSONAL opinions)
RE: Bluetooth
The new Compaq iPAQ H3630 Pocket PC (http://www.compaq.co.uk/press/releases/2000/177.asp) this will sync with other devices thanks to the new Bluetooth jacket thats been developed. Hmm nice Shiny ! http://www.compaq.co.uk/products/handheld/pocketpc/ -Original Message- From: Joe Touch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:52 PM To: Dan Kohn Cc: Parkinson, Jonathan; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bluetooth Dan Kohn wrote: I will bite regarding one issue near and dear to IETF hearts -- which is the seeming need to buy yet another 802.11 card for each IETF meeting. And yes, I am actually suggesting an approach that would require one more purchase: I was at Bluetooth Congress in Europe this month (which sounds better than saying the Bluetooth Congress in Monte Carlo), and Bluetooth products are definitely gathering momentum. ... This would then leave the 2.4 GHz band for Bluetooth, and allow both Bluetooth and 802.11 to be simultaneously active from the same laptop. I think most LANs will be wireless in a couple years simply for the convenience of avoiding cabling (even for desktop computers), and that people will want to sync up with their Palm Pilots and their cellphones Palm syncs with laptops fine over IR now. Joe
RE: IP over MIME (was Re: WAP Is A Trap -- Reject WAP)
I just have 3 things to say WAP, Bluetooth and UMTS. The future looks Quick, the Future looks Mobile. :-) Thanks Jon -Original Message- From: Taylor, Johnny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 4:48 PM To: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: IP over MIME (was Re: WAP Is A Trap -- Reject WAP) All, I have seen a lot of different people bash WAP over the past two days. However, I am a firm believer that WAP will become what IP is to us today. When you relate the technologies of today and the future technologies from a Telecommunication stand point. Then you will find IP is on the rise today and various Platforms are integrating or converging IP to their core networks. But when you equate the moves that are taking place for future solutions to the commercial or residential market. such as The Teledesic Model or AOL or Manasamen; then you began to get a glimpse of the future of WAP. Therefore I think it becomes quite important for this group to keep WAP as one of the main protocols of discussion / solutions. That's my take on WAP! Coming from the Brain! JT -Original Message- From: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 7:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: IP over MIME (was Re: WAP Is A Trap -- Reject WAP) See ftp://ftp.ietf.org//internet-drafts/draft-eastlake-ip-mime-03.txt. Donald From: Magnus Danielson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 10:40:40 +0200 From: Masataka Ohta [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: WAP Is A Trap -- Reject WAP Date: Wed, 21 Jun 0 5:42:32 JST Phil; IP over NAT is, in no way, end-to-end. WAP and IP over NAT are equally bad. I think you're overstating your case. Yes, IP over NAT is bad, but it's nowhere near as bad as WAP. If you think so, don't say "end-to-end". If you want, it is still possible to "reconstruct" a true end-to-end IP service by tunneling it through a NAT with something vaguely resembling mobile IP. You can have IP over HTTP, IP over XML or IP over WAP equally easily. With IP over MIME you could even establish an IP connection over a mail gateway, firewall bypassing... Hmm the same goes for http proxies. The problem, however, is that the reconstruction point is an intelligent gateway which violates the end to end principle. Havent we learned to love and hate these breaking of layering? You can put basically anything over anything else when it comes to just moving bits around. While doing this we get the additional benefits of increased propagation delay, increased overhead, often complexer solutions and a new bag of problems in the interworking area. Lovely. We can feed a lot of research and engineer mouths this way. Now, while NAT and WAP both intend to solve some problems, they provide ground for new problems which naturally require new solutions. We should really ask weither some of these problems really should be solved within that scope or not. If IP over WAP is a bag of worms, maybe one should bypass WAP alltogether. Where we know that neither ATM, IP or NAT solves all the problems neither will WAP. It is not really what you could do as what you should do. Naturally there is allways politically and technical preferences which prohibits some solutions. Cheers, Magnus
Universal Mobile Telecommunication Service (UMTS)
Hi there Folks Juat a quickie, anyone know where I can get information relating to Universal Mobile Telecommunication Service (UMTS) ? Thank Jon. Jonathan Parkinson EMEA Operations Management Center. Remote Server and Network Management Group. Unix Support . Compaq Computer Limited Tel: DTN 7830 1118 Tel: External +44 (0)118 201118 Fax: +44 (0)118 201175 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: CCIE
*Looking at my new AlphaServer GS320,32 CPU'S 256 GB ECC RAM* :-) -Original Message- From: Kurt Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 3:58 PM To: Book, Robert Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CCIE Man, I wish I had 8 megs of RAM ;-) Regards, Kurt Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED] ROW Software and Web Design http://www.rowsw.com - Original Message - From: "Book, Robert" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "'Kurt Weber'" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 9:53 AM Subject: RE: CCIE Kurt, Just an aside. Perhaps, onerous as the thought may be, it's time to upgrade from your '286 w/8MB of RAM and 20 MB harddrive. :-)But your point is well taken. There's been far too little on-topic conversations on this mailing list. Regards, Robert -Original Message- From: Kurt Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 11:08 PM To: Kevin Lahey Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CCIE OK...what was the point of that message? It took me 7 minutes to download on a 56k modem. Not all of us have 45-megabit connections. If you want to send it to him, fine, but please don't send that to everyone else. It crashed my entire system five times just because it ran out of memory. Regards, Kurt Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED] ROW Software and Web Design http://www.rowsw.com
RE: VIRUS WARNING
No offence here people, but whilst we are on the subject of Virus's can we change the Subject Title. I don't know who you all are and I'm getting paranoid :-) Thanks Jon 'Scared Little Puppy' -Original Message- From: Dick St.Peters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 12, 2000 5:31 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: VIRUS WARNING Castro, Edison M. (PCA) writes: WE HAVE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR OUR OWN ACTIONS Yeah, right ... when it comes to shouting, all this "blame the victim" has gone too far. I have users who are *illiterate*. They can click, but they can't read. They can click on little pictures and listen to greetings in their native language or view videos of relatives they haven't seen in decades. I refuse to believe this is bad. Some of my illiterate users just haven't learned to read *yet*. They will when they're old enough to go to school. However, it will be a long time before they can comprehend that the computer screen is a window into a world full of bad people who want to damage their mommy's computer. These users are here in the US. That the 'love bug' worm is believed to have originated in the Philippines should be sufficient reminder that not every potential victim is a literate English-speaking resident of North Americal or Europe. It may be that technology has no way for the network to protect villagers in Bangladesh or central Africa. However, reaching that conclusion and saying the network should not try as a matter of philosophical principle are very different. Of course capable users should protect themselves as best they can, but who is prepared to say that helpless users don't belong on our Internet? -- Dick St.Peters, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gatekeeper, NetHeaven, Saratoga Springs, NY Saratoga/Albany/Amsterdam/BoltonLanding/Cobleskill/Greenwich/ GlensFalls/LakePlacid/NorthCreek/Plattsburgh/... Oldest Internet service based in the Adirondack-Albany region
RE: THe Value Of Following Standards... (was Re: VIRUS WARNING)
This is what happens when a software gient makes up the rules as they go along, all in the name of making the umm user err happy, Now i will spend £30.00 on anti-virus software :-) -Original Message- From: Magnus Danielson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2000 4:24 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: THe Value Of Following Standards... (was Re: VIRUS WARNING) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: THe Value Of Following Standards... (was Re: VIRUS WARNING) Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 10:46:33 -0400 On Thu, 04 May 2000 09:27:19 EDT, Scot Mc Pherson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: The is an e-mail virus going around. The subject of the e-mail is ILOVEYOU...I suggest you delete it the moment you receive it. Somebody didn't read RFC2046, section 2, where it talks about text/plain being *TEXT*, and application/* being *application data*. So if your e-mail software is opening it and feeding it to Visual Basic just because it's tagged .vbs even though it's a text/plain, you're violating the RFCs. I'm not pointing fingers, but ;) You are missing the point here, this is user friendliness, the user is allowed to do whatever he/she wants, even in others equipment with others data. ;) It does make box managment so much easier ;) Cheers, Magnus
RE: Internet SYN Flooding, spoofing attacks
Well he's obviously devoted to this mailing list and hey, perhaps they have the same problems with the Internet on the other side ! -Original Message- From: Lloyd Wood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2000 12:17 PM To: Jean Paul Sartre Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Internet SYN Flooding, spoofing attacks On Fri, 25 Feb 2000, Jean Paul Sartre wrote: Stephen Kent wrote: I'll suggest one course of action, but I keep emphasizing the issue is not one of alternates, but of recognizing the limitations of proposals now on the table and considering approaches that may work irrespective of whether everyone performs filtering. I am willing to write a document on the means of packet filtering and how rules should work for different configurations and environments. You can't, because you died in 1980. hth, L. [EMAIL PROTECTED]PGPhttp://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/
RE: IETF Adelaide and interim meetings for APPS WGs
There is more than America out there ? ;-) -Original Message- From: John Stracke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 3:21 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: IETF Adelaide and interim meetings for APPS WGs Graham Klyne wrote: But I am still uncomfortable with it. It implies that, somehow, any non-US participant is somehow a second class citizen, who is permitted to attend purely as a concession by the US elite whose organization this is. Maybe that also is true -- but I don't have to like it. I very much prefer the "pretense" In other words, the pretense is self-fulfilling: by claiming (and striving) to be global, the IETF avoids driving away non-US participants, which makes the IETF more truly global. -- /\ |John Stracke| http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own. | |Chief Scientist |===| |eCal Corp. |Yes, sir, we've graphed the data. It's a smiley| |[EMAIL PROTECTED]|face, sir. | \/
