Franck Martin wrote:
Is there any linux tool to format the document fast? I don't want to do
it by hand..
You may want to take a look at xml2rfc (http://xml.resource.org).
Regards, Julian
--
green/bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
On 26 Feb 2004, at 15:15, Joe Touch wrote:
Matt Holdrege wrote:
I am shocked that the IETF didn't rewire downtown Seoul to
accommodate our conference! The next thing we'll hear is that our
TDMA phones won't work. Or that they don't have TGI Friday's within
easy walking distance. :-)
About
I should also note that my own message below that I quoted is hypocritical
on my part. If the mail was IETF mail or other important email, I would
have a different opinion. Of course, It was hypocritical of me to say that
mail to others is any less important to its senders and recipients. I
On Wed February 25 2004 16:15, Dean Anderson wrote:
There are many ways to reasonably accurately identify mail to this
list and distinguish it from all others: It is sent to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED].
Nitpick: [EMAIL PROTECTED] could be in the Cc, or worse yet Bcc, field.
--
Dave Aronson,
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Dean Anderson wrote:
There are many ways to reasonably accurately identify mail to this list
and distinguish it from all others: It is sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED].
I haven't seen very much spam that has that characteristic, so I don't
think such spam is much of a
On Feb 26, 2004, at 2:15 AM, Joe Abley wrote:
Also, for GSM subscribers:
http://www.etechkorea.info/articles/20020601001.php
These are CDMA phones which are specially designed for GSM roamers
(you stick your GSM SIM in the back of them). I used a KTF CDMA phone
with my Microcell GSM SIM
From: Robert G. Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
It has been pointed out several times now that unless you are willing to
receive mail only from a small, closed group of individuals that all
agree to use digital signatures and whose mail you whitelist while
blacklisting EVERYTHING ELSE you are
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has proposed a scheme to decriminalize
file-swapping, whereby users would pay $5 a month in license fees. The
annual $3 billion this would net would compensate artists and record labels,
the group says. San Jose Mercury News (2/26), Wired (2/26)
Dan Kolis wrote:
Paypal
and micropayments have been horribly remiss in not developing adiquate
solutions to small payments.
Check out Peppercoin (http://www.peppercoin.com), which has developed a
stochastic model based on aggregating a user's payments. They're
getting some traction in the
Hi,
John S mentioned this micropayment scheme:
http://www.peppercoin.com/General/FAQAnswerPage.ppp?keyID=helpfaq/faqs/Abo
utPeppercointopicIndex=3
Interesting, but its really built on information goods specifically. Like
tradedoor crypto sprinkled with dollar value connections.
Thanks.
I strongly recommend gathering some principles of spam-abatement to
enlighten the spam BOF at IETF-59. (I'd be happy to edit such a
document, but it might be better to chose someone who will attend
IETF-59...
Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we can communicate the fact that
Please note that the BoF scheduled for Korea, MARID, has a
very specific topic and that discussion of other spam-related
issues is not appropriate for that session. The BoF agenda is
available at:
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/04mar/marid.txt
To quote the salient part of the agenda:
This BoF will be
Can we don't pretend we can solve the spam problem on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
james
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 26-feb-04, at 15:05, Robert G. Brown wrote:
It has been pointed out several times now that unless you are willing to
receive mail only from a small, closed group of individuals that all
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Robert G. Brown wrote:
Why in the world does anyone think that digital signature maps with
several orders of magnitude more entities to track, more complexity, and
hence more opportunities for spoofing and finagling are going to succeed
where simple DNS hostname lookup
This may have some general interest.
Comments to [EMAIL PROTECTED], please
--
Agenda for the GEN-AREA meeting in Seoul
Chair: Harald Alvestrand, GEN AD
Date: Monday, March 1, 2004
Time: 1930-2200
Purpose of meeting:
- Go through
-- Virus Warning Message (on ietf-mx)
Found virus WORM_NETSKY.B in file misc.com (in misc.zip)
The file is deleted.
-
read it immediately!
-- Virus Warning Message (on ietf-mx)
misc.zip is removed from
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Ed Gerck wrote:
Spammers need scale (because they get a very low return). Therefore,
part of the solution should be to deny scalability to spammers. You
seem to think that is not possible. However, it is trivial for a
receiver to impose and enforce *both* work and time
Which is a royal pain for me: my email client (mandated by work) doesn't
alllow me to filter on CC: or BCC: addresses. Yuck.
Dave Aronson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2/26/04 05:29:04
On Wed February 25 2004 16:15, Dean Anderson wrote:
There are many ways to reasonably accurately identify mail to
Vernon Schryver wrote:
The idea of forcing your correspondents to jump through hoops that
spammers' computers can't is fundamentally wrong and crazy.
Correspondents are also computers, humans don't do SMTP.
A spammer's computer will happily continue trying to guess the
answer to your
From: Ed Gerck
...
If we force strangers to jump some hoops before their email can reach
our mailboxes, it seems clear to me that we can still keep receiving
email from strangers.
That is the e-postage and other...I'm sorry but the best phrase is
snake oil. There is no and can never be
Vernon Schryver wrote:
The spam problem starts with accepting mail from strangers.
This phrase is a good soundbite. I'd add:
The spam problem starts with *freely* accepting mail from strangers.
If we force strangers to jump some hoops before their email can reach
our mailboxes, it seems
On 26-feb-04, at 15:05, Robert G. Brown wrote:
It has been pointed out several times now that unless you are willing
to
receive mail only from a small, closed group of individuals that all
agree to use digital signatures and whose mail you whitelist while
blacklisting EVERYTHING ELSE you are
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i have ~98% accuracy thanks to bayesian filtering. i
haven't calculated my false positive rate, but i get
false positives. even *one* false positive is
unacceptable. even if my filter accuracy was 99.99% i
would still need to trawl my spam
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
see above response. also, from my perspective digital
signature verification is simpler than maintaining a
filter list. i'm tired of the spam/anti-spam arms
race. i'm going to deploy a solution that is
unspoofable.
No, you aren't. You're quite welcome to try,
We usually need healing for the plenaries, and many traditions drum as
part of a healing ceremony, so ...
See you in Seoul,
Spencer
-- Virus Warning Message (on ietf-mx)
Found virus WORM_NETSKY.B in file party.txt.pif (in party.zip)
The file is deleted.
-
reply
-- Virus Warning Message (on ietf-mx)
party.zip is removed from here
John,
If we can communicate the fact that a message is discarded because it
was categorized as spam back to the sender without adverse side
unfortunately, that act of communication _is_ the adverse side
effect. it tells the spammer that yours is an active, responsive
email account.
d/
--
27 matches
Mail list logo
