RE: LDAP Client API in C with Notification of the end of a reques t
strtok() can be used to break the string pointed to by s1 into a sequence of tokens, each of which is delimited by one or more characters from the string pointed to by s2. strtok() considers the string s1 to consist of a sequence of zero or more text tokens separated by spans of one or more characters from the separator string s2. The first call (with pointer s1 specified) returns a pointer to the first character of the first token, and will have written a null character into s1 immediately following the returned token. The function keeps track of its position in the string between separate calls, so that subsequent calls (which must be made with the first argument being a null pointer) will work through the string s1 immediately following that token. In this way subsequent calls will work through the string s1 until no tokens remain. The separator string s2 may be dif- ferent from call to call. When no token remains in s1, a null pointer is returned. --Original Message- -From: Lloyd Wood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 11:44 AM -To: George Xu -Cc: 'James P. Salsman'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: RE: LDAP Client API in C with Notification of the end of a -reques t - - -On Fri, 25 May 2001, George Xu wrote: - - Very interesting statement about strtok(). Do you know -which OS or where I - can find the material supporting your point here? - -type - -man strtok - -on a unix box. - -L. - -[EMAIL PROTECTED]PGPhttp://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/ -
RE: Proposal to deal with archiving of I-Ds
oh ...hold on folks !, a pgp signature for an expire i-d ?. I think the question was "about whether TO archive or NOT archive ID". some consensus right now is, Some authors = No ; Some authors = yes; Libarian = yes; Historian = yes; IETF = no; and lets stick to the question of why/how ID's are reference in RFC's /pd --Original Message- -From: Bill Sommerfeld [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 9:19 AM -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Cc: Greg Minshall; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: Re: Proposal to deal with archiving of I-Ds - - - Convert the I-Ds to ps or pdf files (something hard to change) - -Postscript files are straightforward for a postscript hacker to -change. I imagine the same is true for pdf files. - -If you want to make the files hard to change, try a pgp signature. - - - Bill -
RE: Netscape Netcenter Unsubscribe
could the list owner block these repetive msg's .. i tkae it.. there is a glitch somewhere --Original Message- -From: Netscape [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2000 7:19 AM -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: Netscape Netcenter Unsubscribe - - -Dear cnri, - -The following email address has been unsubscribed from -Netscape Netcenter: -[EMAIL PROTECTED] - -Thank you. - -: -annmn:[63J4t367U3J5C55UVXa01263Fo5SG32f3W3571Og] - -
RE: ferul/farrell postings
--Original Message- -From: Tony Hain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2000 2:14 PM -To: William Allen Simpson; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Cc: Beatrice Dominguez-Meiers -Subject: RE: ferul/farrell postings - - -Because it is not a technology problem... Join Harald's list -to opt out -of the noise. http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf+censored.html - .. or just create filters on your email client... /pd
RE: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my!
--Original Message- -From: Dennis Glatting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 8:32 AM -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my! - - -Nonetheless, with IPv6, I naively hoped, until last night, the -conservation of space issues would go away, and thus the -fees. Big duh! ARIN ..still needs to delegate/admin the space.. costs will be incured. - -If we look at today's marketing hype and think forward a bit -there is a -thrust to "Internet enable" appliances, such as dryers, ovens, and -stereos. Assuming ARIN fees persist, my first philosophical -question is -whether any consumer of these appliances MUST periodically -(e.g., monthly) -drop coins in the ARIN fountain? what does the appliance have to do with a /32 or /28 ?? -Imagine for a moment the effect of a fee against the -allocation or use of -port 80 or 443, maybe even port 25 or 53. Does IANA charge for port assignment numbers ??
RE: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my!
--Original Message- -From: Rakers, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 9:41 AM -To: 'Dennis Glatting'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: RE: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my! - - The household will perform NAT for -all devices -within (one street address can house many people, not just one). .. and lose out on e2e connectivity ?? imho, primary v6 address arch was to negate the NAT bottleneck..and of course v4 address exhaustion
RE: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my!
v6 address space works out to about 1500 address per sq mtr of the earth's surface... NOW..how many house fit on 1 sqm ? --Original Message- -From: Parkinson, Jonathan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 10:23 AM -To: 'Rakers, Jason'; 'Dennis Glatting'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: RE: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my! - - -Err I think that would take some thinking about ? How many -houses are there -in the world! - --Original Message- -From: Rakers, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 2:41 PM -To: 'Dennis Glatting'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: RE: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my! - - -When household appliances begin becoming IP addressable, I -think we will see -a move towards assigning an Internet IP address per household -(much like -today's street address). The household will perform NAT for -all devices -within (one street address can house many people, not just one). - -
RE: Complaint to Dept of Commerce on abuse of users by ICANN
..and neither do I see the reason why one would waste their time 'harping' about the issue... --Original Message- -From: Russ Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 11:45 AM -To: Jean Camp; vinton g. cerf; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; SNIPPED - -I don't see why anyone would want to waste their time trying -to participate -in something like this. - -Russ Smith -http://consumer.net -
RE: Heard at the IETF
oh... did the other members on the elevator dispute the prime number sequence ..I.E as the elevator descended or ascended ?? if so.. then they were part of the ietf convention else they were a bunch of normal geeks --Original Message- -From: Dennis Glatting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 11:57 AM -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: Heard at the IETF - - - - -Based on an experience of mine last night. - - Q: How can you tell if you are at a convention - with a bunch of geeks? - A: When you are in a crowded elevator and - someone looks down at the panel of lit - buttons and says: look, they're all prime - numbers! - - - -
RE: Heard at the IETF
--Original Message- -From: Steven M. Bellovin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 3:52 PM -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Cc: Jon Crowcroft; Dawson, Peter D; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: Re: Heard at the IETF - SNIPPED .. - -And of course, security folks want the buildings to be -O(2^1024) floors -high, so that we can see some *useful* primes... - - --Steve Bellovin of course, using the floor factors , as indicated... this will eliminate all possibilities of hackers getting into the elevator system.. correct ?.. a total flawless design.. except for base calculations... :))...or maybe not !
RE: Is WAP mobile Internet??
--Original Message- -From: Jon Crowcroft [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2000 11:19 AM -To: Parkinson, Jonathan -Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: Re: Is WAP mobile Internet?? - - - -In message -[EMAIL PROTECTED], -"Parkinson, Jonathan" typed: - - I disagree, WAP, Wireless Application Protocol, Its a way -of transmitting - data I.E. to and from the Web. How does this not fall -under the Internet - Umbrella ? - -1 youcan't get at an arbirtrary web page -2/ you can't get at an arbitraty application written on TCP/IP or -UDP/IP Jon, I wonder how WAP will fit into Multicast apps - even if its single line txt based msg's app ? /pd
pollem
I looking for info on the s/w routine "pollem"... (which is used for firewall monitoring.) any pointers/urls ? thanks /pd
RE: remove me from list
--Original Message- -From: Robert G. Ferrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 3:51 PM -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: Re: remove me from list - SNIP.. - -As to forwarding it to the "appropriate agency for -pursuit...," good luck. -If you find one that does any sort of pursuit, let me know, would you? yeah.. just post back onto the list ! :) THAT info is really welcome !! /pd
RE: Storage over Ethernet/IP
--Original Message- -From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Friday, May 26, 2000 6:27 PM -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: RE: Storage over Ethernet/IP -The point being made, remade and made again here is: -- Any protocol that offers no means of countering such -security threats is -broken, and should not be considered for standardization. -It is perfectly possible that after conducting a threat and modality -analysis, one ends up with saying that hardware-accelerated -IPsec using -host identities is adequate for the scenarios involving -otherwise-unprotected Internet links, and that a mode with no -protection is -adequate when the media is physically secured. - -But the analysis MUST BE DONE. - is vulnerability and threat analysis part of the standardization process ?? /pd
RE: Storage over Ethernet/IP
--Original Message- -From: Steven M. Bellovin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -Sent: Monday, May 29, 2000 1:56 PM -To: Dawson, Peter D -Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: Re: Storage over Ethernet/IP - - -In message -[EMAIL PROTECTED], -"Dawson, Peter D" writes: - - ---Original Message- --From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] --Sent: Friday, May 26, 2000 6:27 PM --To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --Subject: RE: Storage over Ethernet/IP - --The point being made, remade and made again here is: --- Any protocol that offers no means of countering such --security threats is --broken, and should not be considered for standardization. - --It is perfectly possible that after conducting a threat -and modality --analysis, one ends up with saying that hardware-accelerated --IPsec using --host identities is adequate for the scenarios involving --otherwise-unprotected Internet links, and that a mode with no --protection is --adequate when the media is physically secured. -- --But the analysis MUST BE DONE. -- - -is vulnerability and threat analysis part of the -standardization process ?? - -Yes, in order to come up with a reasonable security considerations -section. (Clearly, much of it is site-specific. But the protocol -developers can't ignore it.) - - - --Steve Bellovin - OK...but nowhere in rfc2401/2402 do the STD doc's specify finding's of the security /threat analysis, so how does one state that the std doc, is within the reasonable limits to counter "such threats and security" ?? /pd
RE: Privacy (RE: Should IETF do more to fight computer crime?)
-Original Message- From: Randy Bush [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 1:55 PM To: Dawson, Peter D Cc: 'IETF general mailing list' Subject: RE: Privacy (RE: Should IETF do more to fight computer crime?) Is there a GRIP online email archive ?? details about all ietf wgs are on the ietf web site, http://ietf.org/. grip's in particular is http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/grip-charter.html. randy Thanks, however, I was looking for a online archive..rather then the flat file, archive: http://www-ext.eng.uu.net/grip-wg/grip-wg.txt /pd
RE: Should IETF do more to fight computer crime?
-Original Message- From: Vernon Schryver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 4:14 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Should IETF do more to fight computer crime? From: "Dawson, Peter D" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jacob Palme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But would not better logg production in routers be an aid in finding the villain behind computer crimes? What type of logging do you propose? It seems that the types of logging that are already done enable people to trace the origins of suspicious traffic. --gregbo True, but only the origin of packets are determined. What is needed is a code of ethics between ISPs , to share information. i.e once a packet leaves isp1 cloud and travels across isp2 cloud, very rarely would isp1 be willing to disclose to isp2,... which (user) is leased that specific dynamic ip address. btw, this info would be required on the fly... so that net admin/sec would be in a better position to pinpoint the perpetrator's habits/ physiological profile etc.. Let's actually think for a moment about serious logging or sharing information about Internet traffic. State of the art large routers move Tbits/sec. If the average packet size is 500 bytes, you're talking about logging or sharing information about 100 Mpackets/second. If you only log or share the source and destination IPv4 addresses, TCP or UDP port numbers, in incoming interface, a timestamp, and 1 or 2 bits saying the packet was not unusual (e.g. no TCP options other than window scaling or SAK and no IP options), you're talking about logging or sharing more than 20 bytes/packet or a few GBytes/second/big router. There are 86,400 seconds/day, so you're talking about logging or sharing about 100 TBytes/day per large router. Typical IP paths seem to be at least 10 hops long these days, and often 20 or 30. Most of those routers are not going to be Tbit/sec backbone routers, but more than one will be, and the rest can be counted or aggregated as if they were. Thus, you're talking about logging or sharing several 1000 TBytes/day. Perhaps it would not be a problem to burn 1,000,000 GByte CDROM, tapes, or other media per day, but what would you be able to do with those logs? Searching a 1000 TByte database on the fly, especially if it is merely a primitive sequential log, would be a serious challenge. Yes, not many Tbit routers have been deployed, but they will be, and I think the average packet size is less than 500, which increases the amount of logging. Yes, you might not need to keep those 1000's of TBytes for more than a few days, but you still need a way to do something with them. To put it another way, the complaints from the large ISP's that they cannot police Internet traffic to shield their customers from pornography, talk about World War II political parties, and the other things that various pressure groups and governments dislike have some technical reality. I agree on the technical reality of tbyte storage/tcpdump etc... Technical reality always trumps political blather everywhere that matters. Yes, but if I were behind a DMZ and my IDS triggers... and if I got a source address .. my question is... would 'THe ISP' provide any type of information to negate the threat ? is this a political problem?? , beyond technical reality or just plain non-compliance to 'Collabration' ??? /pd
RE: VIRUS WARNING
this is a good idea !! maybe the security wg could look into this. Jeff, Marcus , any comments ?? /pd -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 12, 2000 2:05 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: VIRUS WARNING On Fri, 12 May 2000 13:38:43 EDT, Jeremy said: Can you plase pleaes stop this Virus Thread. Actually, there *ARE* important issues here. Would the IESG support the creation of a WG to discuss these, with the charter of producing a BCP documenting what *should* be done to minimize these risks in today's internet? -- Valdis Kletnieks Operating Systems Analyst Virginia Tech
