(Finally back after a prolonged sabbatical - last few months have been
too weird/hectic for me to do much of anything IETF-related)..
On Fri, 21 May 2004 15:55:50 BST, Tim Chown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sat, May 22, 2004 at 12:05:00AM +1000, grenville armitage wrote:
> >
> > This could be
On Mon, 24 May 2004 10:18:28 BST, Christian de Larrinaga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I'm hoping that spam filters will detect the inconsistent header information
> and not blacklist me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] but I'm not hopeful.
In fact, there isn't any sane way to detect "inconsistent" header inf
On Wed, 26 May 2004 15:00:00 MDT, Vernon Schryver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I don't see any of those proposals and their competitors as sane.
Oh, I wasn't addressing whether the proposals were workable, merely listing
proposals motivated by the fact that verifying the legitimacy of a sending
ma
On Thu, 27 May 2004 18:23:17 +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum said:
> There is also the possibility of blacklisting known bad credentials.
Anybody who's had to get themselves out of 3,000 private blacklists, and
anybody who's had to fight with places that were blackholing the 69/8 address
space, knows
On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 11:04:06 PDT, Joe Touch said:
> STD-5 is a nice choice - it actually refers to 6 different RFCs.
>
> So which one redirects to STD005.txt, and what is in it?
>
> (To see this noted in the RFCs themselves, see STD-62, which refers to a
> set of 8 different RFCs.)
>
> And wha
On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 12:43:50 CDT, Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> --ccjixvqhktnezunmahim
> Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>
>
>
>
>
OK, so it's content-free. At least it's buzzword-free too. ;)
Question - the Received: headers in
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:23:44 EDT, Mike S said:
> Any router configured to block ICMP packets is, quite simply,
> in violation of RFC792 (STD5), which clearly states "ICMP is actually
> an integral part of IP, and must be implemented by every IP module."
> For a router, "implemented" means forwar
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:00:29 PDT, Sally Floyd said:
> to the browser. Presumeably if the web server wanted to use something
> like QuickStart, it could have the firewall configured to allow the
> IP QuickStart Option not to be blocked on the outgoing SYN packet?
Given the number of times we've h
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 18:43:23 EDT, Dean Anderson said:
> Mr. Vixie's obvious malice for Av8 Internet is plain to see,
As is the fact that the feelings appear to be mutual
> services to customers. However, it is unclear what Mr. Vixie's expertise
> is actually in, other than name-calling, an
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 11:11:25 +0900, Masataka Ohta said:
> With your motivation explained and with your three new categories,
> all of which are unrelated to telecommunication providers but
> related to hotels, I think I can understand your fundamental
> mistake.
More generally, Internet access is
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 13:39:07 +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum said:
> But that's just a detail. The real difference is that you can buy a car
> anywhere on the landmass of your choice and then bring it to whereever
> you want to use it on that same landmass. With IP service, you're
> limited to what
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 21:29:37 +0200, Hadmut Danisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> OK, there was some discussion about different
> levels of Internet services and categories.
>
> So should the IETF publish a definition?
There's discussion in progress off-list. The problem is that although it's
pro
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:46:20 EDT, Sal Mangiapane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> 5.4. Copyright Notice (required for all IETF Documents)
> "Copyright (C) The Internet Society (year). This document is
> subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP
> 78, and ex
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:56:46 EDT, Sal Mangiapane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Is it the intention to always include the IPR statement and the RFC
> Editor will only "ensure" it when an IPR disclosure has been made?
I read it as "If we are aware of an IPR claim or disclosure, the RFC Editor
will i
On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 22:05:36 +0200, "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> "the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) is a function performed by
> ICANN".
> http://www.iana.org/procedures/delegation-data.html
> grounds that it may not be still here in two years. The majority of
On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 08:10:57 PDT, Michel Py <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > Tim Chown
> > Oh, you can filter out any sender easily enough. The snag
> > is you see all the replies people send to their mailings :(
>
> Indeed.
Procmail filtering on 'From:|To:|cc:' is easy enough. There's probably
a
On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 12:38:01 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Your e-mail account has been temporary disabled because of unauthorized access.
Our virus scanners are still nailing some 30K Bagles a week. Are there
really people net.clued enough to be subscribed to the IETF list, but
with so few
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 14:28:37 EDT, Michael Richardson said:
> Even if they do not result in efficiencies in the routing table, I
> think they would go a long way to making people happy.
If you want to make people happy by promising technically infeasible solutions,
I suggest a career in politics
On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 18:41:53 EDT, shogunx said:
> How about a city in the US which agrees to not engage in such
> behavior, and has an international airport, and several private airports?
The cities aren't given a choice in the matter - some bright bulb in the
federal bureaucracy decided that fin
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 06:22:54 EDT, shogunx said:
> And if we bring suit against this obvious invasion of privacy,
It's been tried.
http://freetotravel.org/
pgpi3AgZS6a1Q.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://ww
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 09:10:24 EDT, Sal Mangiapane said:
> > Thank you. I was also looking for an RFC - if any -which documents why.
> >
> There is RFC3552 which is the Security Considerations Best Practices but
> it doesn't answer the WHY question.
At the risk of stating the obvious
Anybody
On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 06:40:30 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> --
> Warning: Message delivery wasn't performed.
>
> Reason: Our virus scanner detected very suspicious code in
> the attachment of a mail addressed to a user of our sy
On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:27:52 EDT, Bill Sommerfeld said:
> Huh? There have been (small numbers of) clued people wearing collars
> and ties at just about every IETF I've attended..
And I'm willing to bet that at least some subset of the clued-collar-tie-IETF
group is actually a clued-tshirt-corpora
On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 17:18:19 EDT, Tony Hansen said:
> The information about the mbox format being anecdotally defined is
> incorrect. The mbox format has traditionally been documented in the
> binmail(1) or mail.local(8) man pages (BSD UNIX derivatives) or mail(1)
> man page (UNIX System 3/5/III
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:47:52 EDT, Tony Hansen said:
> The claim in Appendix A is that there were no authoritative sources of
> documentation for the mbox formats and otherwise it's "only documented
> in anecdotal form". I'm sorry, but the the definitions ARE there, and
> ARE almost always autho
On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 07:30:24 EDT, scott bradner said:
> there seems to be an assertion of evil intent here that is not the case
The problem isn't one of current evil intent, the problem is that there's
a hole in the tent that an evilly-intented camel could get far more than just
its nose through.
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:52:26 +0800, =?gb2312?B?dGVzdA==?= said:
> 3.The authority database guarantee all \"Email-content servers\" are related with
> legal ESPs.
This is somewhere between "highly unlikely" and "totally unworkable".
Problems:
1) Who controls the authority database? Why should I
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:40:39 +0200, Harald Tveit Alvestrand said:
> I do sympathize somewhat with the people who just want "someone to take
> care of this" and choose not to comment in detail on the document - we have
> to make sure they know what's going on, but we cannot force anyone to
> act
On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:38:21 PST, Tony Hain said:
> all space currently considered lost. Given that IANA allocated 9 /8's over a
> 6 month period this year, coupled with the fact that only 78 /8's remain in
> the useful part of the pool (ie: 52 month burn out),
They said that just before CIDR hap
On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 22:48:16 +0100, Gert Doering said:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 04:31:46PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > So 40% isn't even *allocated* yet (saying that we're probably burning /8's
> > faster than needed, but only 36% of the available space is actually routed.
> >
>
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 13:23:30 EST, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ said:
> And trying to be positive, I will strongly suggest that the next IETF we
> have a new type of training: "How to deploy IPv6 in your network".
This seems more appropriate for a NANOG tutorial, or many other places/times,
than an IETF m
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 08:39:44 EST, Stephane Bortzmeyer said:
> No, in one location :-)
> http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html
Yes, but didn't you see the "Beware of Leopard" sign on the
way down the stairs? ;)
pgp48g7cHZcQv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 09:34:44 PST, Tim Bray said:
>
> On Nov 12, 2004, at 7:51 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
>
> > Believe me, I know the difference between a big rat and a squirrel
>
> Everybody knows there are lots of rats in Washington, as in any capital
> city. -T
Are there *any* cities *
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 06:40:35 EST, Fred Baker said:
> That is the ISP's choice. As a percentage of total volume, SMTP/ESMTP is a
> small proportion of total traffic, or so please I can read sample
> measurements (like
> http://www.caida.org/dynamic/analysis/workload/sdnap/0_0_/ts_top_n_app_bytes
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 02:02:18 GMT, Paul Vixie said:
> given the relative ease of acquiring v6 address space and the relative
> ease of deploying v4+v6 end hosts and either v4+v6 campuses or v6 tunnels
> in v4 campuses, there is no incentive to do nat/v4 any more, and precious
> little incentive to
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:10:33 +0100, Kurt Erik Lindqvist said:
> I have long thought that the knowledge of having long (life-long)
> persistent, well-spread unique personal identifiers are bad was general
> knowledge. Then again, I guess the US biometric stuff has proven me
> wrong on that alrea
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:44:30 +0100, Jeroen Massar said:
> Ack, nicely turn that NAT box into a real router by flashing it with a
> This is unfortunately not something that most people dare to do. Then
> again, I know that quite a lot of people 'upgraded' their SpeedTouch
Argh. Flashing it with a
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:46:23 +1200, Franck Martin said:
> Well, in most Pacific Islands, there is only one operator who is nearly
> fully owned by the government, so the words "sole ISP" and "country" can
> be interchanged. The countries there are islands, physically and virtually.
While waitin
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:16:58 EST, Sam Hartman said:
> Personally, I do believe that stating some details would help me
> evaluate whether IASA is seperable and would require the IETF's
> consent in order to change the details. I do think that requiring
> IASA keep separate bank accounts is probab
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 02:33:54 +0100, "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" said:
> But why to spend time and money and to take risks to change something which
> is not broken. IPv6 has no problem in keeping the same host numbers if the
> used addressing plan uses a numbering scheme designed with that purpose in
On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 11:41:24 EST, Michael StJohns said:
> The IASA, AdminRest et al discussions appear to be proceeding well, but
> perhaps it might make sense to craft a mailing list specifically for those
> discussions ?
On the one hand, part of me says "Amen, this stuff makes my brain hurt".
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:46:52 EST, Bruce Lilly said:
> Accessibility has not been a problem for this implementor (who,
> incidentally, was unaware of this draft until the New
> Last Call). ISO 639 language code lists are readily available in
> HTML-ized English and French via
> http://www.lo
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:04:36 PST, Asif Pathan said:
>I want to know that is it possible to transfer the fingerprint
> (converted) coding over net? If yes then which protocol we use if no then why?
http://www.rhyolite.com/anti-spam/dcc/ describes one method in common use.
You might also
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 11:33:54 GMT, Misha Wolf said:
> I find statements such as this mind-boggling. Please explain what you
> mean by "much support". There have been at least as many individuals
> writing mails in favour of the document as against it. Furthermore,
> it has been made clear tha
#x27;s amazing
that dancing bear can dance at all...
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
msg09538/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
essed header*. The hint is
"since the output packet can be larger than the input packet". Contemplate the
algorithm, and see if you can see what states will cause the 120 byte header to
require 128 bytes after "compression".
--
Valdis Kletn
(probably off topic here) include lower prices, breaking of a cartel.
Notice that you don't get the lower prices and cartel breaking by increasing
the number of domains, you get it by increasing the number of registrars.
--
Valdis Kletnieks
On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 13:44:04 EST, "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" said:
> I dispute the accuracy of this assertion below (unless "registrars" is a
> typo for "registries" in which case we agree totally and you can ignore
> what follows):
I meant registries, and we *are* in agreement. ;)
On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 08:28:57 PST, "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" said:
> The only way to resolve this issue properly would be to require every
> submission to an IETF mailing list to be cryptographically signed (PGP
> or S/MIME), to require the subscribers to register their signing key and
> to then filt
t's easier and
cheaper to just settle rather than take it to court.
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
msg09572/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ng the entire IETF gets less than a tenth of a customer.
But they got a tenth of a customer for *ONE* piece of outbound mail.
Which is an extraordinary response rate.
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
msg09577/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 14:33:16 PST, "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" said:
> OCSP scales fine for revocation checking. We can use the same
> platform that currently serves 6 billion DNS queries a day.
The fact that OCSP scales fine for revocation checking doesn't mean that
you have a system that scales fine
ditional info" field then saves you another resource hit when an
OCSP query gets made.
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
msg09608/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
"Informational".
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
msg09612/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, 06 Dec 2002 14:03:43 GMT, Lloyd Wood said:
> Bush and Bernstein are both the kind of people who wish to rearrange
> the world entirely to their own satisfaction. How unfortunate that
> they must share that world.
It would be a lot simpler if one or both of them qualified as a net.loon (we'
On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 18:54:14 PST, Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > From: Paul Vixie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >> COM is a failed experiment and needs to be closed and/or eliminated.
> > i thought i'd already said that. yes, i did. in november, 1995.
>
> h
On Fri, 06 Dec 2002 14:34:14 PST, "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" said:
> The problem here is that having Randy Bush moderate is
> not a scalable solution to the problems of Spam in general.
We could clone him, but that's probably not scalable either
msg09660/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signatur
the DNS, you have to do a compute-intensive proof.
What would people think of that idea?
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
msg09679/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
upgraded software-wise to support a scheme, even if it takes zero additional
CPU? I strongly suspect that the *big* issue in getting said box to play nice
won't be the CPU, it will be trying to find a way to upgrade whatever
creeping-horror bletchware mailer they're using on Windows 3
100% perfect anti-spam solution. Like most societal ills,
if we can fix 98% of it, we can move on.
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
msg09684/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
server "accept any mail
that presents a token that hashes to ", where I provide a test that
doesn't provide any information regarding the sender.
Why? Because I don't trust my government to resist the temptation. (Nor do I
trust any OTHER national goverment, for that matter).
On Mon, 09 Dec 2002 00:47:45 EST, Bill Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> How about passing a law that makes eveyone install a BIOS patch to block out
> spam. ;-)
There exist systems that don't have a BIOS. ;)
(Making this reply mostly because there's been serious DRM proposals
that have thi
ation scheme that
doesn't imply any authentication?
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
msg09712/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, 09 Dec 2002 17:47:58 EST, Edward Lewis said:
> >Does anybody have a reference on an authorization scheme that
> >doesn't imply any authentication?
>
> World readable files.
We know how to do that already ;)
I was thinking more along the lines of a zero-knowledge proof or
something like
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:57:59 EST, "Gray, Eric" said:
> On top of that, some spammers are actually breaking the law.
> Gotten any South African "my late died and left me ..."
> mail lately? Those people belong in jail...
Or this:
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20021209
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 10:34:10 EST, Eric Rosen said:
> Naturally every special interest group claims to be the defender of the
> values of the larger community. Since there is no way to determine
> objectively what is or is not in the "larger community's" interest, a
> properly
(*) I'll let wiser people than I decide if there should be such a section
in a son-of-2026
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
msg09798/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:14:16 PST, Bill Strahm said:
> I hope EVERYONE deeply involved in a WG documentation process has deep
> DEEP conflict of interest problems. I mean if we are not working on the
> things we are documenting, how will we know if they work or not.
Quite true. And I believe I sai
On Mon, 23 Dec 2002 03:57:59 GMT, Paul Vixie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> What if (as in this case) it was in the past, and Olafur had no current
> or prospective income riding on BIND9, but he did once work for a company
> who did some subcontract work related to BIND9? Would he still be tainted
ernet Security in hopes that they'll either pick it up or
know who should be doing it.
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
msg09856/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 20:35:34 +0100, Florian Weimer said:
> There was quite a bit rejection, and some very profound criticism (the
> killer argument, IMHO, is that a large part of the industry does not
> accept _any_ disclosure at all).
Wander over to NANOG - a large(*) part of the ISP industry do
On Sun, 05 Jan 2003 23:10:56 EST, Melinda Shore said:
> I'm not sure which is more impressive - that you chose to
> forward private email to several mailing lists, or that you
> chose to insult someone by referring to him as a woman.
Could be worse. We've had no complaints from any of the robot
provide the original citation for the statement (similar to):
"The flame you are complaining about did not cast any aspersion on your
parentage or dietary preferences, and as such was mild by IETF standards"?
--
Valdis Kletnieks
On Sun, 05 Jan 2003 19:04:41 EST, Doug said:
> It seems to me if the mail server administrators would make the decision to
> require people that send emails from their servers to log into a valid
Your proposal would fix the problem, but end up tossing a large quantity
of babies out with the bathw
On Mon, 06 Jan 2003 16:56:20 +1200, Franck Martin said:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Could be worse. We've had no complaints from any of the robotic or
> > space-alien intelligences about the human-centric language
> > used on this list
hemes are *NOT* a long-term solution - if any of those packages becomes
widespread enough to actually impact the spam problem, the spammers will
have a little Perl program scanning the bounces and canning the "yes I'm
not a spammer" responses.
--
erent addresses. And no, we
won't change this unless you first manage to get hotmail.com and aol.com
to not use different inbound and outbound addresses first, as they do the
same thing for the same reasons.
--
Valdis Kletni
On Mon, 06 Jan 2003 18:08:44 EST, Doug said:
> You can tell the difference between 1, 2, and 3 because they all have
> a different DNS/IP footprint.
They do? Are you sure of this? I'll give you a hint - if you're outside
the two /16's of our network, and you get an inbound SMTP connection from us
to be relatively simple to find - it has to be simple enough
that even a victim who doesn't have enough kloo to stop to wonder why the
"confidential and private" Nigerian scam arrived via spammage can figure out
how to get aboard
--
Valdis Kletnieks
On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 01:46:50 EST, Bill Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Who does the real IE work in the Internet world? Is it the IESG or IAB?
That's what working groups are for.
> Seems like there's more arguing on this list than anything else.
You haven't been here long, have you? ;)
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 19:51:51 GMT, Lloyd Wood said:
> Simon Spero wrote:
> >
> > I believe Kapor's law was first stated at the January '92 Usenix (The
> > first use for any new communications technology is sex).
>
> any SUCCESSFUL communications technology, surely?
This must mean that 3G phones ar
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 10:30:18 PST, "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> [*] Its only an assistant professorship that by European lights
> only ranks him as a mere lecturer. The fact that he has to refer
And by common US practice, he has a PhD and is accorded the title Doctor.
At th
ion of non-canonical versions that
possibly have errata in them. If I create a derivative work by adding hyperlinks
and the like, and accidentally change a 3 to a 4 or something like that, all
sorts of mischief will result
--
Valdis Kletnieks
ural difference that lead to
MIME and X.400.....
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
msg10069/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 09:29:13 +1030, Andrew Rutherford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Voice Mail. A number of ISDN access devices without significant local
> storage are capable of converting an incoming call to an SMTP stream
> on the fly and spooling it to a mail server. Pretty much everyone who
>
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 18:56:12 GMT, Lloyd Wood said:
> You fail to grasp the fundamentally non-participatory role of the
> non-participant.
And the non-participants are there why, exactly? (Note that I'm basically
clueless on this one - there's been a few IETFs that have actually been
plausible for
mentations were non-conforming to THAT too - but the situation has
improved dramatically since then. And note that there are more servers
for *THAT* protocol, from more vendors, than for DNS.
--
Valdis Kletnieks
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003 13:48:23 GMT, Lloyd Wood said:
> Saying it's broken implies the act of breakage.
>
> At what point was the software NOT broken?
It's quite conceivable the software was BAD (Broken As Designed).
It's pretty clear to me that either djbdns or BIND was BAD. I'm just not
sure whi
On Sat, 08 Mar 2003 01:16:48 EST, shogunx said:
> Cant you just type ftp at a unix shell?
> Or use one of the 3D or X11 ftp clients available for the 3D user
> interface for linux?
3D? Where? ;)
/Valdis (who has concluded that NVidia's GLX drivers, XFree86 4.3.0, and
the Linux 2.5.64 kernel don't
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003 15:59:28 PST, Bob Braden said:
> There are minutes of a number of key meetings recorded in RFCs.
> EG more than you ever wanted to know about how FTP or Telnet
> or NCP came about!
Any in particular you'd nominate for "cautionary tale" status? ;)
pgp0.pgp
Description: PG
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 15:37:23 MST, Doug Royer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> If you are talking about TLS certs (not S/MIME certs) then the ISP can
> issue them to the customer directly (be a CA for connections from their
> customers over TLS connections). I have read that the customer can be
> given
piling on some broken
system where you have to jump through hoops to get rational memory management.
If so, your only long-term real hope is to use software that actually works.
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 07:56:06 EST, Keith Moore said:
> I think you mean "every domain"; DNS names don't need to correspond to hosts
> anymore (and often don't). I'm not sure why it's inherently impractical to d
o
> this, especially if it were possible to have a single cert that covered
> multiple
On Fri, 21 Mar 2003 09:01:54 +0200, Pekka Savola said:
> However, I'd strongly suggest adding some small amount of text to
> rationalize the editorial style, to avoid a thread like this occurring
> when people wonder whether the style is correct or not.
Would a "We prefer to follow style manual
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:27:01 PST, Tony Hain said:
> Pekka Savola wrote:
> > Not so. (If you build your system in an optimal fashion --
> > which really
> > does need a bit fleshing out, though.)
>
> So the intent is to dictate to everyone how they build their networks?
We issue RFC's and BCP's
On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 08:47:45 PST, Michel Py said:
> two pieces of duct tape is really way superior to Cisco products". Yeah,
> right. If Cisco became market leader, it is because of their ability to
> design and manufacture products that actually work in enterprises and
> not because of questionab
On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 14:00:31 EST, "David R. Oran" said:
> Did anybody consider just handing out a /48 (or a bit smaller)
> automagically with each DNS registration?
Routing Table Bloat. If you can figure out how to do this in a CIDR
aggregation context, or otherwise work around the table problem
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:17:44 PST, Eliot Lear said:
> Right up till the point where two companies start communicating with one
> another directly with site-locals. Even if there is a router frob to
> keep the scopes scoped, you can bet it won't be used until someone
> realizes that the above pro
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 15:49:03 CST, Matt Crawford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > Let's assume that there is a FooBar server in SiteA. If another
> > node in SiteA (NodeA) is communicating via a multi-party application
> > to a node in SiteB (NodeB), and wants to refer NodeB to the FooBar
> > server
On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 00:23:15 +0200, Jeroen Massar said:
> Effectively this could be resolved by having one globally
> unique identifier per node. The underlying protocols should
Paging Noel Chiappa Paging Noel Chiappa ;)
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
1 - 100 of 572 matches
Mail list logo
