These items sound IMHO like important groundwork for that latter document.
By focusing on such things as these early, a WG avoids getting bogged down
in religious wars OR reinventing yet another wheel. Once these two
Informational RFCs are written, either this WG or another can always "do the
Yes, my ISP is charging me for my DNS entry -- a static entry made once in a
zone file, but I'm paying monthly to have a domain name! Never mind that I
don't use their mail server or Web page service or DNS server
And yes, additional IP addresses were going to cost dramatically more. NAT
be re-engineered so that it does. -- Ian
-Original Message-
From: Perry E. Metzger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 1999 2:54 PM
To: Ian King
Cc: 'Richard Shockey'; Keith Moore; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: IP network address assignments/allocations information
gital form)
Please forgive my typing -- my daughter is keeping one arm busy.
-- Ian King, Speech Product Group, MICROSOFT CORPORATION
-Original Message-
From: Masataka Ohta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 3:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
S
are, in the long run, not good ideas, although they
are useful as interim solutions. Some of them are just too violent to the
rules of the game as they are defined (by us!), and/or establish technical
or process precedents that are too dangerous to be allowed.
-- Ian King
-Original Message
"Near-perfect example"? I beg to differ. I used to work for a Local
Exchange Carrier.
The telephone number situation in the United States has been one of
continual crisis for years, because of rapid growth in use (in part because
of Internet access!). The area served by a given "area code"
Yes, we made a guess -- a design compromise. Folks, we're engineers, and we
come up with "good enough" answers. Sure, we try to make sure that the
"good enough" answers are good enough for the majority of situations, for a
reasonable length of time. But we're not prophets or philosophers or
The goal of those who write viruses is to get attention, true? I guess they
figure that writing their viruses for Windows is going to get them a lot
more attention than writing for other operating systems with smaller user
bases. :-)
Tongue firmly in cheek -- Ian King
--
DISCLAIMER
IMHO that's an excellent suggestion. It's been my experience that when you
state that the draft is itself an agenda item, previously resolved issues
often get rehashed, sometimes contrary to the clear consensus of the list.
This strategy would also allow less opportunity for those who haven't
It's not a question of whether Fleming's opinions were popular - it's just that they
were wildly irrelevant to the work of this list. Having read many of his postings, I
can only conclude that either (a) he was deliberately flame-baiting (and often
successfully) or (b) his clue meter for
Huh? I've been running PPTP over NAT for years - I'm doing it right
now. But it would be great if the ISPs began to migrate; tools (e.g.
tunneling) are available to allow them to do so even if their upstreams
lag.
-Original Message-
From: Rinka Singh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:
WONDERFUL idea. I get I-D announcements from the groups whose lists I
join. -- Ian
-Original Message-
From: Pete Resnick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:03 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Splitting the IETF-Announce list?
I am interested in getting
Waitaminute, I thought NAT rants had been relegated to the authority of
one Dante Alighieri for proper assignment to a low, lonely circle of
hell -- Ian
-Original Message-
From: Eliot Lear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 3:47 PM
To: Randy Bush
Cc: [EMAIL
WARNING! WARNING! Recurring mailthread alert!
This conversation seems to recur during or just after every meeting
-- Ian
-Original Message-
From: John Stracke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 9:33 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Blue Sheet
Once upon a time, when I was a Working Group chair, I asked the
Secretariat for a copy of the blue sheet from my session; my goal was to
direct mail to persons who had been there, to discuss issues raised
there (in case they weren't subscribed to the list).
Granted, one of them took umbrage
.
Is this an appropriate forum for this conversation? I ask instead: is
there any place where we should not acknowledge this outrage against all
humankind?
- Ian King, speaking solely for myself
-Original Message-
From: Andrew J. Shore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001
To quote the eminently quotable Benjamin Franklin:
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
We who maintain this collaborative venture known as the Internet must
continue to educate our elected officials in matters such as
17 matches
Mail list logo
