--On Friday, August 30, 2013 09:56 -0700 Bob Braden
wrote:
> CR LF was first adopted for the Telnet NVT (Network Virtual
> Terminal). I think it was Jon
> Postel's choice, and no one disagreed.
A tad more complicated, IIR. It turns out that, with some
systems interpreting LF as "same position
John,
I don't think it would of been fun designing and testing a text-based
hosting protocol manually with your terminal/telecommunication/telnet
client "New Line Mode" (add LF to CR) option disabled or server text
responses only issue CR or LF.
It would of been very hard or confusing to do
CR LF was first adopted for the Telnet NVT (Network Virtual Terminal). I
think it was Jon
Postel's choice, and no one disagreed. Then when FTP was defined, it
seemed most economical
to use the same. In fact, doesn't the FTP spec explicitly say that the
conventions on the control
connection shoul
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 8:57 AM, SM wrote:
> Hi Murray,
>
> At 01:14 21-08-2013, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>
>> Ah. I realize that CRLF is standard line termination for SMTP; is it
>> automatically the expected line termination for all line-oriented
>> protocols? I don't know about others.
>>
Hi Murray,
At 01:14 21-08-2013, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
Ah. I realize that CRLF is standard line termination for SMTP; is
it automatically the expected line termination for all line-oriented
protocols? I don't know about others.
I would have to write a long answer to that question. :-) I
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 12:43 AM, SM wrote:
>
> Why is that?
>>
>
> The media type is "text/plain".
>
>
Ah. I realize that CRLF is standard line termination for SMTP; is it
automatically the expected line termination for all line-oriented
protocols? I don't know about others.
-MSK
alculates reputation values on demand would
conceivably give a new value for every query. If a client wants
that up-to-the-moment accuracy, then Expires is
counterproductive. On the other hand, an operator that calculates
reputation values daily could indicate this by setting an Expires
field
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 10:13 AM, SM wrote:
> The draft-iet-repute-model reference is a down-ref.
>
I agree, the model document should be considered for PS instead.
>
> "A server receiving a query about an application it does not
>recognize or explicitly support supp
At 07:41 15-08-2013, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the Reputation Services WG (repute)
to consider the following document:
- 'A Reputation Query Protocol'
as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final commen
On Fri 11/May/2012 08:56:14 +0200 IETF Chair wrote:
>
> We have identified space in Vancouver to hold the "Bits and Bites" event,
Would it be possible to design a _unified_ event board that mentions
_all_ the events at the location, including this one, WGs, BoFs, not
only IETF, but also IRTF, ISO
gle power strip and access to the IETF
wireless network. Additional power or wired network connections may require an
additional fee from the table sponsor.
Thanks,
Russ
On Apr 16, 2012, at 11:40 AM, IETF Chair wrote:
> We sent a query to the community on March 16, 2012. There was a di
m) 484-962-0060
> w) http://www.comcast6.net
> =
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IETF Chair
> Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:40:22 -0400
> To: IETF Announce , "ietf@ietf.org"
> Subject: Query to the community -- An additional
w) http://www.comcast6.net
=
-Original Message-
From: IETF Chair
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:40:22 -0400
To: IETF Announce , "ietf@ietf.org"
Subject: Query to the community -- An additional IETF Meeting event?
>We sent a query to the
We sent a query to the community on March 16, 2012. There was a discussion on
the IETF mailing list. We also presented the topic in the IETF chair and IAOC
chair presentations at administrative plenary at IETF 83, and there was an
active discussion at the open mic that followed.
Our
I have two comments on this.
1) I am in favor of allowing the IAOC to experiment with an event (or two)
like this for the purposes of developing running code with the associated
pros, cons and economics.
2) I would attend such an additional event if the gear on display was
related to technology
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> +1. If it's really the social, or better, the Sunday night event, then
> great. I've been at two NANOGs for beer-n-gear, and while I found it a
> bit weak in "gear", and not that well attended, I actually enjoyed it.
>
Must have been a while a
> "Wes" == Wes George writes:
Wes> That said, I don't think that this potential experiment
Wes> requires a *separate* night. I'd much prefer to replace the
Wes> current "overpriced hotel cash bar" arrangement at the welcome
Wes> reception with something more like beer-n-gear.
IAOC Chair
Lähet.: 16.03.2012, 22:14
V.ottaja: IETF Announcement List
Aihe: Query to the community -- An additional IETF Meeting event?
The IESG and IAOC are considering an addition to the IETF meeting week, and we
would like your views before we develop the idea further.
At NANOG, there is a Beer
I think this is a good thing to try.
-Original Message-
From: ietf-announce-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-announce-boun...@ietf.org] On
Behalf Of IAOC Chair
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 4:14 PM
To: IETF Announcement List
Subject: Query to the community -- An additional IETF Meeting event
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Henk
> Uijterwaal
>
> We have had cases where the opening reception was sponsored by somebody other
> than the host for the meeting (if there was a host). The sponsor didn't get
> much more than the possibility to put a sign
this. That is, it's a form of "may we proceed to do the research and
> planning?"
> query.
I'm fine with the IAOC doing the research.
Henk
--
Henk Uijterwa
-announce-boun...@ietf.org] On
Behalf Of IAOC Chair
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 4:14 PM
To: IETF Announcement List
Subject: Query to the community -- An additional IETF Meeting event?
The IESG and IAOC are considering an addition to the IETF meeting week, and we
would like your views before we
Those vendors who want to organize themselves into a beer & gear
should do so and then coordinate with the IETF early in the planning
process in order to have space they can pay for. They can either pay
the IETF or pay the hotel for the incremental meeting cost. There is
no need for the IETF to t
Hello everybody,
The beer and gear seems to work pretty well at Nanog, and therefore it is
a good idea to consider it for the IETF. However, I am a bit worried that
we are, however, not seeing the difference between the IETF and Nanog.
Nanog is a Network Operator Group. Hence, the name. Vendors co
On 3/16/12 14:19 , Fred Baker wrote:
>
> On Mar 16, 2012, at 2:13 PM, David Meyer wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Fred Baker
>> wrote:
>>> The question I would ask is: "who are the vendors marketing to,
>>> and what are they selling?" At NANOG, that's fairly clear;
>>> companies lik
On Mar 16, 2012, at 2:23 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> But these are worth pursuing only if the community is comfortable with the
> basic idea of doing this kind of event.
I'm willing to do the experiment.
we proceed to do the research and planning?"
query.
Part of "exploring" is to develop a sense of the marketing issues, exactly as
you and others have raised.
But these are worth pursuing only if the community is comfortable with the basic
idea of doing this kind of event.
On Mar 16, 2012, at 2:13 PM, David Meyer wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
>> The question I would ask is: "who are the vendors marketing to, and what are
>> they selling?" At NANOG, that's fairly clear; companies like Cisco and
>> Juniper, and resellers like Network
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
> The question I would ask is: "who are the vendors marketing to, and what are
> they selling?" At NANOG, that's fairly clear; companies like Cisco and
> Juniper, and resellers like Network Hardware, are selling to their customers,
> who are of
The question I would ask is: "who are the vendors marketing to, and what are
they selling?" At NANOG, that's fairly clear; companies like Cisco and Juniper,
and resellers like Network Hardware, are selling to their customers, who are
often technical decision makers or senior staff in companies t
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 8:49 PM, IAOC Chair wrote:
>
> The IESG and IAOC are considering an addition to the IETF meeting week, and
> we would like your views before we develop the idea further.
>
> At NANOG, there is a Beer and Gear reception one evening. There are
> exhibitor tables with produ
The IESG and IAOC are considering an addition to the IETF meeting week, and we
would like your views before we develop the idea further.
At NANOG, there is a Beer and Gear reception one evening. There are exhibitor
tables with product vendors (hardware and software) and service providers
(reg
Would a general access policy lookup tool protocol be viable here? It
could bolt-on to both DHCP and NEA but seems like the same additions
would be good in both. The same is true with many other protocols.
Especially (from my perspective) those being used in automation and
testimony generation
Hello dear Michael,
Thank you for your reply. There is an additional query about your reply:
In our realization, the remote address is regarded as unreachable until the
Heartbeat Message from TWO different local address(IP1 and IP2) exceed PMR.
It means that IP1 sent 4(PMR value) Heartbeat and
On Mar 14, 2011, at 3:36 AM, Will Yu wrote:
> Hello dear Michael,
>
> Thank you for your reply. There is an additional query about your reply:
> In our realization, the remote address is regarded as unreachable until the
> Heartbeat Message from TWO different local address(IP1
On Mar 11, 2011, at 7:44 AM, Will Yu wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a query on SCTP standard (RFC 4960). In section 8.2 Path Failure
> Detection, it describes the action which end points should take in detecting
> path unavailable.
>
>When its peer endpoint is multi-home
Hello,
I have a query on SCTP standard (RFC 4960). In section 8.2 Path Failure
Detection, it describes the action which end points should take in detecting
path unavailable.
* When its peer endpoint is multi-homed, an endpoint should keep an*
* error counter for each of the destination
On Apr 15, 2010, at 3:30 AM, Sambasiva Rao Manchili wrote:
Hallo,
I have a query related to SCT Mulithoming communication paths.
Host-X: (IPpx IPax): Multihomed Association with Host-Y (IPpy
IPay).
Host-X SCTP Client is running with SCTP stack provided by Vendor X
Host-Y SCTP
Hi -
> From:
> To: ;
> Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2010 9:02 AM
> Subject: RE: Query on SNMP Error Fields
...
> This is an strict expectation as per SNMP RFC specs ,
> that the Set/GEt/GetNext requests set the error status
> and error-index field to 0.
Citation, plea
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of Randy Presuhn
Sent: Fri 5/14/2010 11:58 PM
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Query on SNMP Error Fields
Hi -
> From: "deepak rajaram"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 4:18 AM
> Subject: Query on SNMP Error Field
Hi -
> From: "deepak rajaram"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 4:18 AM
> Subject: Query on SNMP Error Fields
...
> While the SNMP RFC(1157/2571/SNMPv3) mentions the behavior of "Error Status"
> and "Error Index" field as "will be set in the
Hi,
While the SNMP RFC(1157/2571/SNMPv3) mentions the behavior of "Error Status"
and "Error Index" field as "will be set in the response" and the value of
these fields in all set/get/getnext request is zero, It does not mention if
it is *mandatory* for these fields to have zero in set/get/getnext.
16. April, 2010 09:25
To: Sambasiva Rao Manchili; ietf@ietf.org
Cc: Antonio Gambin; Markus Locher
Subject: Re: SCTP Mulithoming Communication PATHS Query
Hi Samba,
It seems there is firewall between host-X and host-Y, so the cross path packets
can not reach the destination?
In my understanding,
Hi Samba,
It seems there is firewall between host-X and host-Y, so the cross path packets
can not reach the destination?
In my understanding, some aspects may impact the result.
As far as I know, different vendors maybe provide different implementation.
some provide parallel path, like
io Gambin" ; "Markus Locher"
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 6:30 PM
Subject: SCTP Mulithoming Communication PATHS Query
Hallo,
I have a query related to SCT Mulithoming communication paths.
Host-X: (IPpx IPax): Multihomed Association with Host-Y (IPpy IPay).
Host-X SCT
Hallo,
I have a query related to SCT Mulithoming communication paths.
Host-X: (IPpx IPax): Multihomed Association with Host-Y (IPpy IPay).
Host-X SCTP Client is running with SCTP stack provided by Vendor X
Host-Y SCTP Server is running with SCTP stack provided by Vendor Y.
Notation.
IPpx
Hi,
you really want to be asking this on the TSVWG list. CC and Reply-To set
accordingly.
Lars
On 2009-12-4, at 1:57, Sudhanva Mudigere Narayana Gowda wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a query regarding sctp multihoming behavior.
>
> I have setup a multihomed association and this is my
On Dec 4, 2009, at 12:57 PM, Sudhanva Mudigere Narayana Gowda wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a query regarding sctp multihoming behavior.
>
> I have setup a multihomed association and this is my observation
>
> Host_A (IP a): Local single Homed endpoint
>
> Host_B (IP b(
Hi,
I have a query regarding sctp multihoming behavior.
I have setup a multihomed association and this is my observation
Host_A (IP a): Local single Homed endpoint
Host_B (IP b(Primary), IP c(secondary)): Remote multiHomed endpoint
During Heartbeat I see that even though the Heart beat req is
Dear RoHC ers,
I am having ambiguity regarding "Context memory feedback" option.
RFC 3843/ 5225 says:
The CONTEXT_MEMORY option informs the compressor that the decompressor
does not have sufficient memory
resources to handle the context of the packet flow, as the flow is
currently
Dear RoHC ers,
I am facing ambiguity regarding handling of Mode Cancellation for IR &
IR-Dyn Packets in Profile -0x0004 (RFC 3843).
RFC 3843 says:
The Mode parameter for the value mode = 0 (packet types UOR-2, IR
and IR-DYN) is redefined
to allow the compressor to decl
Dear RoHC ers,
I am facing ambiguity regarding (Profile 0x104) classification in RoHC
V2 Profiles.
1. On what basis we will choose Profile 0x104 in Version-2 Profiles?
Because, as mentioned in RFC 5225, all the Profiles present
in Rohc Version-2 support arbitrary numb
On Sat, Dec 06, 2008 at 06:23:02AM -0800,
Dave CROCKER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
a message of 37 lines which said:
> One could imagine producing a BCP about common DNS implementation and
> operation errors or, more positively, recommendations for implementation
> and operation.
>
> One could
tions for implementation and operation.
One could equally imagine some group actively pursuing improvements to the major
implementations (and operations) that have problems.
I seem to recall seeing small forays in this direction, in the past. Your query
might encourage an organized effort
it is valid for life long?
Regards,
Kapil
From: Michelle Cotton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 9:15 AM
To: Gupta, Kapil
Subject: Re: Query
There is no fee.
It can be done as quickly as a few days if the application fo
it is valid for life long?
Regards,
Kapil
From: Michelle Cotton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 9:15 AM
To: Gupta, Kapil
Subject: Re: Query
There is no fee.
It can be done as quickly as a few days if the application fo
, Kapil; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Query
Yes.
For ports specifically see
http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers
Most registrations with individuals listed as the contact applied
directly to IANA.
Other registrations were made through publication of RFCs.
Let us know if you have any
Yes.
For ports specifically see
http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers
Most registrations with individuals listed as the contact applied directly to
IANA.
Other registrations were made through publication of RFCs.
Let us know if you have any further questions.
Thank you,
Michelle Cotton
Lots of people have.
See http://www.iana.org/protocols/apply/
Regards,
-drc
On Mar 25, 2008, at 6:16 AM, Gupta, Kapil wrote:
Good Day All,
I have a question. Did any one try to register any port for his/
their application/service through IANA?
Please help.
Thank You,
Kapil
The informat
Good Day All,
I have a question. Did any one try to register any port for his/their
application/service through IANA?
Please help.
Thank You,
Kapil
The information contained in this electronic mail transmission
may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected
from
t we assemble a credible
collection of information about actual development and interoperability
testing -- and deployment is a form of testing -- for RFC 2821.
Because SMTP is a rich and widely-deployed protocol, the goal of this query is
to ask for enough information to be useful, but not to place
this query.
Sridhar Aemalla___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
--On 8. oktober 2002 17:54 + Ramkumar Sankar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> besides DHCP, are there any other protocols that use this subnet
> directed-broadcast address while sending out IP packets?
SMB, the Microsoft-derived filesharing protocol, can be (mis)configured to
use subnet-dire
> Ramkumar Sankar wrote:
RS> is there any server implementation that replies to client requests using the
RS> 'subnet directed-broadcast' rather than the limited ip broadcast (i.e all
RS> 1s)? ...
> Joe Touch replied:
JT> What would be the utility in doing so, e.g., given the fact that th
Ramkumar Sankar wrote:
> is there any server implementation that replies to client requests using the
> 'subnet directed-broadcast' rather than the limited ip broadcast (i.e all
> 1s)? ...
What would be the utility in doing so, e.g., given the fact that they're
no more likely to traverse a router
hi,
is there any server implementation that replies to client requests using the
'subnet directed-broadcast' rather than the limited ip broadcast (i.e all
1s)? i believe linux and unix implementation do the latter, but the RFC
does not preclude sending the former..
besides DHCP, are there any ot
Hi,
I have a "Solid" database and since Solid DB doesn't have much
flexibility as compared to other user friendly DB's like MS SQL or
Oracle, can anybody tell me how do you migrate the data from the Solid
Database to say MS SQL 7.0.
Thanking you all in advance.
Regards
Mohit Mathur
Aneuya wrote:
>HI,
>
>This query is regarding Kerberos V5.
>
>I want to know in case of WAN, what the flow of
>request starting from the client to the application
>server will be when it doesnt have the ticket for it ?
>Does client have to know the adrress of Kerberos
HI,
This query is regarding Kerberos V5.
I want to know in case of WAN, what the flow of
request starting from the client to the application
server will be when it doesnt have the ticket for it ?
Does client have to know the adrress of Kerberos
server ?
Your help will be immensly appreciated
Hi ,
This is Shivendra and I am working on SNMP interfaces for a optical
network NE.
We are providing row creation mechanism on SNMP tables using SMI v2
directives( using
RowStatus). In the Set Pdu , we want to allow the requests for
multiple row creations over
same/different tables. We
70 matches
Mail list logo
