*audible sigh*
Yet another useless thread added to my Gmail inbox because of a changed
subject line.
Can we please stop doing this for conversations that are about the same
topic? Numerous users on this list have clearly shown they are annoyed by
this, and frankly is something that the list
On Sunday, January 14, 2024 6:01:45 AM UTC William Herrin wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 12:58 PM Bryan Fields wrote:
> > On 1/12/24 3:04 PM, Mu wrote:
> > > Would it be possible for you to reply in-thread, rather than creating a
> > > new thread with a new subject line every time you reply to
On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 12:58 PM Bryan Fields wrote:
> On 1/12/24 3:04 PM, Mu wrote:
> > Would it be possible for you to reply in-thread, rather than creating a new
> > thread with a new subject line every time you reply to someone?
> >
> > Trying to follow the conversation becomes very
Thank you, everyone, for your responses.
Abe, I appreciate your enthisam but it is obvious you are not interested in
collaboration. You are singularly-minded and trollish.
I am assigning your email address to my spam filters. I will not see any
future communication from you.
O.
On Sat, Jan
It appears that Randy Bush said:
>> Some of us still use pine$B!D(B
>
>i thought most pine users had moved to mutt
Some, but pine (now called alpine) is still actively maintained and
does some things better than mutt, particularly if you want to keep
track of multiple inboxes on different
Things you have to remember. Not everyone uses thunderbird. Not every mail client threads like thunderbird. — Sent from my iPhoneOn Jan 13, 2024, at 17:39, Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
Hi, Bryan:
0) Thank you so much
for coming to the rescue!!!
On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 9:48 AM, Tom Beecher wrote:
> Vint told you the same thing other people have been telling you for years.
> You don't seem to name drop anyone else. Weird.
>
Indeed — Vint made an observation, but this was not intended to be
endorsement…
Implying that it is is
> Some of us still use pine…
i thought most pine users had moved to mutt
randy, who uses wanderlust under emacs :)
Hi, Bryan:
0) Thank you so much for coming to the rescue!!!
1) Basically trained as a radio frequency hardware engineer, I am
only capable of using software as tools necessary for my work. For
eMail, I have been using ThunderBird ever since its beginning. With my
own time-stamping
Hi, Seth:
0) Thanks for bringing up this pair of Drafts.
1) While I believe your "IPv4 Unicast Extension" team carried on with
the first, Avinta got accidentally exposed to the second. After analyzed
the hurdle it faced in adding on to RFC1918, the EzIP Project is now
focusing on
Some of us still use pine…-MikeOn Jan 13, 2024, at 12:57, Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
Hi, Gary:
0) My apologies!
1) I thought that I am one of only a few who
insist on using the most basic tools that get the job done, such
preferring hand tools than
On 1/12/24 3:04 PM, Mu wrote:
Would it be possible for you to reply in-thread, rather than creating a new
thread with a new subject line every time you reply to someone?
Trying to follow the conversation becomes very difficult for no reason.
Threading has nothing to do with subject lines.
On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 6:32 AM Christopher Hawker wrote:
> Further, over the last three days you've changed the subject
> line of the thread at least 12 times. Can you please stop changing
> it because every time you do, it starts a new thread and makes it
> rather difficult to keep track of
Hi, Gary:
0) My apologies!
1) I thought that I am one of only a few who insist on using the most
basic tools that get the job done, such preferring hand tools than power
tools if possible. I believed that the ThunderBird eMail client software
was pretty basic. Your message just reminds
Yo Abraham!
On Sat, 13 Jan 2024 07:35:09 -0500
"Abraham Y. Chen" wrote:
> FYI - Please see the below copy of a partial eMail thread. Bold,
> red colored and Italicized letters are to focus on the topic.
Uh, you realize many of us never see your red or italics?
RGDS
GARY
>> If you limit each requesting organization to a /22 per year, we can
>> keep the internet mostly functional for decades to come,
>
> at least in the ripe ncc service region, all this proved was that if
> the cost of registering a company (or LIR) and applying for an
> allocation was lower than
* ayc...@avinta.com (Abraham Y. Chen) [Sat 13 Jan 2024, 18:16 CET]:
0) Your sender name is in an unusual format. It becomes just the
generic NANOG address as the recipient for me to MSG send to.
Your numbered lists are 0-indexed. So clever! Also, your MUA
seems to understand
Hi, Niels:
0) Your sender name is in an unusual format. It becomes just the
generic NANOG address as the recipient for me to MSG send to.
1) " You have posted this statement like five times now in the past
two days. ":
Perhaps so, I have been responding to numerous comments
Ok you've triggered me on your point 2. I'll address the elephant in the
room.
IPv4 is never ever going away.
Right now consumer services are mostly (mobile, wireless, landline, wide
generalization) are IPv6 capable. Most consumer applications are ipv6
capable, Google, Facebook, etc.There is
Hi, Christopher:
Thanks for the confirmation.
Regards,
Abe (2024-01-13 11:42)
On 2024-01-12 07:30, Christopher Hawker wrote:
"Source NAT changes the source address in IP header of a packet. It
may also change the source port in the TCP/UDP headers. The typical
usage is to change the a
> at least in the ripe ncc service region, all this proved was that if the
> cost of registering a company (or LIR) and applying for an allocation
> was lower than the market rate of ipv4 addresses, then people would do
that.
Funny you say that, I had the same discussion with someone yesterday.
Vint told you the same thing other people have been telling you for years.
You don't seem to name drop anyone else. Weird.
Respectfully, you have no credibility in this area. I happened to notice
this gem re-reading your draft last night,
A.1.1. T1a Initiates a Session Request towards T4a
>
>
Matthew Petach wrote on 13/01/2024 00:27:
In light of that, I strongly suspect that a second go-around at
developing more beneficial post-exhaustion policies might turn out
very differently than it did when many of us were naively thinking
we understood how people would behave in a
Implementing EzIP, as Forrest mentioned 3 days ago, has far more challenges
than implementing IPv6. It will also cause far more incompatibilities when
it comes to routing traffic between a network which has implemented it and
one that hasn't. It also sounds like another version of NAT,
On 13/01/2024, 08:40:11, "Giorgio Bonfiglio via NANOG"
wrote:
2) Assume that Google decided that they would no longer support IPv4 for any
of their services at a specific date a couple of years in the future. […] I
really expect something like this to be the next part of the end game for
Hi, Tom:
1) " ... Implying that Vint Cerf ever said anything about EzIP
... ":
FYI - Please see the below copy of a partial eMail thread. Bold,
red colored and Italicized letters are to focus on the topic.
***
internetpol...@elist.isoc.orgeMail thread
On 2021-10-18
Let me start with I think we're largely on the same page here.
The transition I see happening next is that the consumer traffic largely
moves to IPv6 with no CG-NAT. That is, if you're at home or on your phone
watching video or doing social media or using whatever app is all the rage
it's going
> 2) Assume that Google decided that they would no longer support IPv4 for any
> of their services at a specific date a couple of years in the future. […] I
> really expect something like this to be the next part of the end game for
> IPv4.
It’s never gonna happen … why would Google, or any
A couple of points:
1) There is less work needed to support IPv6 than your proposed solution.
I'm not taking about 230/4. I'm talking about your EzIP overlay.
2) Assume that Google decided that they would no longer support IPv4 for
any of their services at a specific date a couple of years in
29 matches
Mail list logo
