IESG
considers that the document proposes something that conflicts with,
or is actually inimical to, an established IETF effort" (which I have
not heard out of the IESG yet), the RFC editor should (with the
required changes of getting rid of "implied standardhood") publish
the do
for this
possibility.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated
Ph: (217)337-6377 or (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
On 4/9/00 at 2:06 PM -0600, Vernon Schryver wrote:
From: Pete Resnick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Uh, no. I see no deployed support for this document and therefore see
no relevance to the Internet community to have this document
published. If noone on the Internet is doing it and I'm
lly adding something of value.
Some MUA's do just that.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated
://www.ietf.org/join.html
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated
On 12/13/00 at 1:30 PM -0800, Lane Patterson wrote:
Would the IETF organizers consider requesting WG/BOF attendance
plans upon registration?
They do ask when the meeting is scheduled. It is up to the chair to
estimate appropriately.
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eudora
in this mission?
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated
if there is sufficient text in the I-D (or suggested
replacement text posted to the mailing list) to define the issue.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated
Ph: (217)337-6377 or (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
On 12/20/00 at 9:37 AM -0800, Dave Crocker wrote:
At 11:20 AM 12/19/00 -0600, Pete Resnick wrote:
How about a first step: In WG sessions that I chair, there are
going to be no more presentations. From now on, one week before the
IETF meeting, document editors will be required to send me a list
em with
presentations that answer questions about the draft. What I do have a
problem with is presentations that describe the draft (in whole or in
part) when noone has asked for clarification.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated
Ph: (217)337-6377 or (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
e prettier
dog and pony. If you can't write your proposal down in an I-D
effectively, then it's not going to go into an RFC effectively and we
might as well not waste face-to-face meeting time on the proposal at
all.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated
need to be
complete specifications? An introduction and architecture alone would
make a fine I-D and a fine starting place for WG discussion.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated
that the
agenda has URLs for that information. Now, I understand that BOFs are
in a somewhat different position and sometimes there's going to have
to be presentation of new material in BOF meetings, but that needn't
always be the case. WGs, of course, have no excuse.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto
want his
privileges reinstated to explain why his postings are in any way
within the scope of this mailing list.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated
have
presented their analysis of the situation. So again I ask: Do you
think that his posts are reasonably within the scope and charter of
this mailing list? If you're unwilling to explain why they are, I see
no point in continuing to discuss this.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
to implement this? If I am correct and
there are an awful lot of people who are uninterested in I-D
announcements, it would cut down on outgoing mail of the secretariat
substantially.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated
wouldn't be in favor of that split.
And again, this might significantly cut traffic out of the secretariat.
Any other objections to such a move?
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated
23 I-D announcements per
day, usually all in the AM. That's a good hunk of mail, especially on
those days when I'm out and about and sputtering over my poor little
mobile phone as my data link.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated
use and then pass it on to the secretariat if it turned out to be of
use. I am not on a network that would make this reasonable. Someone
else suggested that they were working on it.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
of variants of the above. A widely
deployed dynamic DNS makes a good deal of service location protocol
unnecessary. Seems like a good thing to me.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
(and I believe Keith) think it is that latter point that needs to
be explicitly stated in the BCP: Bringing official knowledge to the
IETF is useful and important, but that does not give the delegate and
special weight or privilege in the working group deliberations.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto
not disable these
conversions. It explicitly encourages these conversions.
Textual support? 6.1 and 6.4 seem to give lots of reasons not to do
the conversions.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
is not
censorship. Everyone who participates in a discussion with the IETF
is a member of the IETF, including those folks who proposed IPv4
variants. That they couldn't get rough consensus for their proposals
is not problematic.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM
it
requires a day by itself.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated
on this list does not seem ripe enough to
warrant one. And overall I'm pretty darn sick and tired of wasting my
time in WG/BOF sessions where all I get is a series of undiscussed
presentations that could have been done in I-Ds which I could have
read before the meeting.
--
Pete Resnick mailto
not want them to step on ours. there have been incidents of this
kind of issue with other sdos, and we try to be careful. make sense?
Absolutely.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
on polling or a constant connection to
the mail server. The work item is to come up with a protocol that
does notifications. Does the above not describe that work item
appropriately?
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
) that should give you the impression that
the intention is otherwise.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
. The charter that I was part of
creating didn't mention IMAP in the work items, in my mind because
the WG should not be required to use IMAP if POP or some other
existing protocol would do.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858
topic to be discussed at the
Thursday morning Anti-Spam IRTF group meeting.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated
its operations. I also think that
an Informational RFC is exactly what is called for; a BCP would
require IETF consensus and would inappropriately compete with the
problem-statement work.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858
not by any means saying that PGP is a perfect solution. It's just
that the liability scenario is very different because amount of
damage any given signer can do is much different.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
is more or less applicable to
solving the spam problem is not something I'm willing to discuss in
this forum.
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
of his invalid arguments. I
suggest others might also benefit from subjecting Dean's messages to
careful scrutiny; I have found them lacking in factual information
and quite misleading.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651
see how crypto
or authentication apply to spam in the context of POP here.
pr
--
Pete Resnick mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QUALCOMM Incorporated
of the multicast config is done on my network
beforehand?
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated
a step further.
what problem are we trying to solve here?
Please have a look at draft-hoffman-imaa,
draft-klensin-emailaddr-i18n, and draft-duerst-iri. Certainly the
first two have very explicit descriptions of the problem.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM
at this point to local-part does not
take into account some of the possibilities.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
). After
hearing nothing, I called them and got a confirmation number. Perhaps
it is a NACK rather than an ACK protocol?
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
layer
that we have always avoided doing because of the cost of having to
engineer around it. From the view up here in the nosebleed section,
it seems like it is worth at least the attempt to get a solution.
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated
suggested alternative proposal is
just wrongheaded.
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated
of documents from other SDOs do because of
liaison agreements)
(assuming that captures what Harald, and Scott, intended in their attempts).
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
A B, I would be much
more at ease with those choices.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman
suffice.
But that would entail giving the IETF chair signature rights *to sign
for ISOC*. That would be sufficient for these purposes, but is
completely undesirable in that we were trying to get IAB/IESG members
*out* of the business of administrative tasks.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http
with that kind of MoU.
I again ask for you to please explain how you think this setup will
work other than to have the ISOC be the contracting party.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
with IETF
administrative functions (like contracting for meetings, contracting
for ISP and web service, etc.), referred to in Carl's document as
IETF Foundation. Incorporating that sort of entity wouldn't change
the insurance coverage for members of the IETF, would it?
pr
--
Pete Resnick http
to the old wording. If you need a
reference to insert, see RFC 1305, Appendix E, sections 7 8.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL
will not be speeding in answering e-mail over the next few
weeks, so if you have personal comments for me, please be patient for
my reply.)
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
resistance to it to
be a cause for concern.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
be nuts not to try to get some
backstop measures into the BCP.)
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
thing that ISOC does which codifies in some
interesting way the adoption of the relationship by ISOC
I also suggested to insert for the part in :
adoption of an ISOC by-law signifying the adoption of the principles
laid out in this BCP.
That's it.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com
codifying mechanisms. I can't speak for others, but I suspect there
are others in the same boat with me.
I suggest that we close this ticket as no change required - the
issue will not be forgotten, but it should not affect this document.
I object to this entirely.
--
Pete Resnick http
block in the way for a few people doing utterly silly things. For the
IETF side, we've made a BCP (which will be a pain for us to get
consensus to change). I want some similar commitment from ISOC.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858
will start deploying it even if it's a bad idea really need to
present some evidence that such has happened with IANA registrations
in the past.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf
or IAB members out, even if doing so hurts the
IETF and the Internet, to
avoid embarrassment of someone who shouldn't be there is just too
politically correct.
Scott, what in the draft would force this case? This is just FUD mongering.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick
On 8/1/05 at 4:47 PM +0200, Eliot Lear wrote:
Pete Resnick wrote:
I personally would like to see more people get experience on the
IESG and get some IESG brain cells back into the community before
they're completely burned out, so I kind of like the proposal.
Why discourage the NOMCOM from
review during the
WG process), but I don't think there's any complaining about the IESG
making that sort of determination.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1
on and is a formulation of the new area that I support.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
well enough?
(If SAI is reasonable, and I think it is, let's use that
reformulation and be done with it.)
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman
On 9/24/05 at 4:41 PM -0400, Scott W Brim wrote:
On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 11:15:51AM -0500, Pete Resnick allegedly wrote:
Signalling Applications and Infrastructure Area
Actually, I screwed up: It's Signalled Applications and Infrastructure.
Some relationships are established or tailored
reasonable refreshments earlier in the afternoon, I could
live with this schedule.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1
only the most
important meetings then. (And no, I don't mind if my meetings are
then. I'll be there anyway.) To the extent possible, BOFs should be
early in the week so that they can be chewed on during the week.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated
cheap. The St-James is also close, but now so
cheap. :-) )
This is the first time in a long time I'm seriously considering *not*
staying at the conference hotel. I'm not sure I see the point.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651
On 4/20/06 at 4:21 PM -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Thursday, 20 April, 2006 14:15 -0500 Pete Resnick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anybody know the walking distances to the venue from hotels on
the east side? I plan to vacation there the week before, and both
the Hôtel XIXe siècle
) such that there is no undue
influence into internal processes by those who hold the purse strings.
I see no need for a formal requirement of *approval* in this case either.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
to the IESG (or the IAB).
I suggest that the IESG and the IAB always decline to decide such
issues in the future should similar appeals come up.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
about some nits. Here are couple more:
- Strike A-1-g-3. It's redundant with A-1-g-1.
- Change category to stream in A-4-b. Category doesn't make any
sense there (or if it does, it's undefined.)
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651
On 7/17/06 at 8:52 PM +0200, Frank Ellermann wrote:
Pete Resnick wrote:
Appeals of this sort should not be brought to the IESG (or the
IAB). I suggest that the IESG and the IAB always decline to decide
such issues in the future should similar appeals come up.
The question then shifts from
to consider
such grounds for appeal, and to decide whether to accept or reject
them.
I think this is an error, and I urge the IESG and the IAB not to do
so in the future.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated
___
Ietf
think that is useful input for their process.
The Trustees shall review the situation in a manner of its own
choosing. They can ask for the opinions of anyone they choose.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651
.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
a relatively easy extension to RFC
3461 (by adding some sort of additional parameter value to DELAY).
Not exactly rocket science. Not exactly requiring spinning up a WG.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
On 11/5/06 at 2:38 PM -0800, Pete Resnick wrote:
On 11/4/06 at 4:04 PM -0800, Fred Baker wrote:
Questions abound around the mechanisms for sending an email and
ensuring that it is delivered in a stated time interval on the
order of minutes or that an indication of failure is returned
. NeuStar Secretariat Services
Bidders seek to perform one or more of the following Secretariat
services:
1. Meeting Services
2. Clerical Support Services
3. IT Support Services
Can you say which of the 6 bidders bid for which of the 3 services?
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick
are they not
kicking out other guests instead of us?
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
On 11/29/07 at 10:15 AM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:23:10AM -0600, Pete Resnick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 22 lines which said:
It's not geographic balance of places on the world map that
people are talking about here. It's geographic balance
header sections.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
nothing to do with this discussion.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
sanguine about being able to get my basic services up
and running under IPv6 anytime soon.
I'm somewhere between depressed and amused.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
independent clients don't implement this thing or clients can't
get it right), we can always go back and make changes. But the fact
that some clients do a similar operation differently is *not* a
reason to delay publication.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm
chair, who has not completed his list of currently
desired items on the grand list of things to cover in this BOF,
hereby groans at the thought of adding another.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
no field can be guaranteed to ever be private-use
only, we discourage the use of any field starting with 'X-' so as not
to confuse folks into thinking it's private-use. It may not be.
I don't think we can get consensus on such text.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm
would have immediately
said, Fine with me. I'm happy to have people to whom such things
can be delegated, but I do want to hear the words We've done our due
diligence.)
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated
___
IETF
.
Gotta love that! ;-)
Sounds like a fine idea to me.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo
that when no technical
confusion exists, you *would* consider such things an editorial
issue? (A misplaced comma or the use of the passive *may* cause
technical confusion, but unless this is called out, the assumption
is always that such things are editorial issues.)
pr
--
Pete Resnick http
(and that is what the
AD in question has said about the effect of the DISCUSS) with *no
technical justification* of why an explicit working group decision
should be reversed (there has been none given) is a clear process
violation.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm
they
mean when they write a document. That has not been my experience
reading ISO documents, but perhaps it's because I work in the IETF.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
used, changing them from perfectly good examples that have
interoperated for 7 years without problem has the potential for harm.
Please change them back to their original forms. I'd be far less in
favor of an appeal against *that* DISCUSS.)
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick
requirements are in order to avoid late surprises, and (b) puts
reviewers of this memo on notice so that consensus can be reached on
what are or are not real showstoppers for IESG review.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858
in
review until it is in there is silly beyond belief. Make a note to
the author that they need the reference and continue consideration.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
inviting people to comment.
Thoughts on this?
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
My name was submitted to the NomCom for the position of Apps AD, and
I've told the NomCom I'm willing to be considered. Of course, this is
no guarantee that if I get selected, I'd still be able to serve.
Please send them whatever positive or negative feedback you have.
--
Pete Resnick http
it is that
Google News does to determine new articles was tickled in some way by
ZDNet UK. Probably worth a report to the Google News people to take a
look at their algorithm.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651
of the process for an *IETF* standards
track document, work on it in the IETF.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https
really need to read over John and Ray's comments. The original
text is simply not correct.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
still agree
with your above paragraph.)
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
community consensus on
the email architecture) in fear of how it might be used is frankly a
bit nuts. Let's address the problems as they arise rather than
further diminishing the meaning of our document series.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone
and its brethren.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
On 7/3/09 at 10:16 AM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 3 jul 2009, at 0:35, Pete Resnick wrote:
A much better solution would be HTML, if it's sufficiently constrained.
Or, gee, we could generalize to a very constrained XML format
XML isn't a display format.
And how
1 - 100 of 244 matches
Mail list logo
