Re: Mailing list policy
Hello: Well, it was yet another burst of suggestions. But, what was the problem? And, whose problem? Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote: >> When you are the maintainer of a list > That assumes that someone is the maintainer of the IETF mailing list. > At this moment, that is not the case. You are asking that an > additional task be put on one of the IETF Secretariat folks. That's > a reasonable request (and one that I would second), but it is not > based in current reality. Well, then it is about time that a system/ organization with an annual turnaround of millions of dollars has (a) mailing list maintainer(s). But, to whom do the IETFS folks reporting anyway? To the IESG? CNRI? IAB? ISOC? Or, directly to the goddess of confusion herself? Robert Elz wrote: > A supposed technological fix to a non-technological problem that just > made things worse, not better. Why? I agree with what ned.freed wrote: > In general, I agree with this assessment. But that doesn't mean that > some point fixes don't help in some cases. -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Tarlumobi di hamu Raja ni Hula-Hula dohot Tulang nami,bah!
Re: advertising on official IETF mailing lists
Hello: First of all, thank you for reply. And by the way, you do not need to send me an extra copy of your email (since I am on the IETF list). Second, I get more annoyed when receive: - extra copies of a same email - "I am out of office" messages (guess: how many will I receive soon...). - be rich in 7 days adv. - Goldstein's tonner supply adv; compared to a single predictable (filterable) "monthly report" posting. Third, but it should not be considered as supporting that monthly report post. I was questioning the reason for stopping it. On Tue, 15 May 2001, RJ Atkinson wrote: >>- That message, "was passed through [EMAIL PROTECTED]" >> Therefore, it is kosher :^). > Nope. IETF Censored isn't an IETF list, though an IETF list > is filtered (by someone other than an IETF officer) into that list. So, why had that "IETF officer" not censored it until recently? >>- Last, how different is that message compared with >> the monthly ietf_censored posting? > > IETF censored is not an IETF official mailing list. > IETF Censored is a private mailing list operated out of Italy. Yes, but it is allowed to do a montly posting to the IETF list? Forth, we can work it out... we can work out... Life is very short, and there is no time for fussing and fighting my friend... best regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - If ain't broke, ain't fix IT;but I'm broke, so IMFix IT!
Re: contents July COOK Report on Ethernet in the first mile
On Mon, 14 May 2001, Harald Alvestrand - IETF Chair wrote: > I believe this advertising is inappropriate on the IETF list. > Please stop. > At 20:25 12.05.2001 -0400, Gordon Cook wrote: >> >>The COOK Report on Internet July 2001 (Vol. 10, No. 4) >> >> [...] Why? - Too late: after more than 10 years, why stop it now? - That message, "was passed through [EMAIL PROTECTED]" Therefore, it is kosher :^). - Last, how different is that message compared with the monthly ietf_censored posting? from me to you (da da da da da dam dam da :-), -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - If ain't broke, ain't fix IT;but I'm broke, so IMFix IT!
Re: Carrier Class Gateway
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Peter Deutsch wrote: > Errr, actually carriers don't have 16" guns, the battleships did. There Arizona had (has?) 14" ones. At least, when I visited Pearl Harbor a couple of years ago Anyway, will this proposed protocol also apply to STD carries over V* cannal ? :-) regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - If ain't broke, ain't fix IT;but I'm broke, so IMFix IT!
Re: How to parse an AXFR response packet
Hello: I have checked the POISSON charter: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/poisson-charter.html which has no goal at all. Therefore, I can predict that this thread will go to /dev/null, with or without using .procmail. Also, this vendetta can be traced back to 1992: http://ittf.vlsm.org/ietf/16.txt Lloyd Wood wrote: > This seems to be a clear example of emergent mailing list > behaviour I worried about in recent discussion on Poisson > (hence the cc.). RFC-2418 is a product of the POISSON group. Do you believe that the WG should revise it? If yes, which part? > Here, XYZZY holds the conflicting roles of chair, A hollow sound plugh... :-) DISCLAIMER: I believe that DJB's tough DNS implementation sucks, but that is not the point! regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - If ain't broke, ain't fix IT;but I'm broke, so IMFix IT!
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-wildgrube-gnp-01.txt
John C Klensin wrote: >>What should I do if I could not find a internet draft that >>was announced as an I-D action in IETF-Announce? > Or try www.ietf.org directly, being sure that you are > not going through any interception proxies or other intermediate > caches. OK, I have got the idea. But, what if somehow an I-D does not exist in that IETF repository? What I have in mind is: procedure log login to several sites in different countries (US, Germany, etc.); carefully log everything (e.g. date, 404 messages, etc). until "found" do begin wait 24 hours; repeat procedure log; end. right? -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - If ain't broke, ain't fix IT;but I'm broke, so IMFix IT!
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-wildgrube-gnp-01.txt
Lloyd Wood wrote: > That was the odd one out, but I'm getting 404 Not found for other > recently-announced drafts. Perhaps uploading before announcing would > be good. Simple Question: What should I do if I could not find a internet draft that was announced as an I-D action in IETF-Announce? (See also: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ietf-i-d_action/messages/ ) Proposed Answer: - Do nothing; this is a fixable known problem. - Notify the IETF webmaster(s?); with a risk that they will not admit this bug. - Notify the IESG. - Complain through the IETF list. - Complain to the IAB, cc to ICANN, Nanog, ISOC, RFC- Editor. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - If ain't broke, ain't fix IT;but I'm broke, so IMFix IT!
Re: IESG Response to Copyright appeal
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The problem is that when you take *that* stuff into account, I've spent > (or have committed to spending) *more* time trying to comply with the > GPL than I have actually making useful things available. OK, I am convinced that GPL creates problems, especially for the maintainers. Now, back to the original issue that I have raised, i.e. IESG's assertions on: Doing so, according to our counsel '...is as close to a "contribution to the public" that we can get'. Is that really true that the BCP-9 text was developed by the IETF (not ISOC!) lawyers specifically to deal with IETF documents? Furthermore, (AFAIK) haven't these counsels also recommended that "Foo of Conduct" modification? I just put the GDL as a comparison. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- The Kappa likes getting cucumber --- Budum... Budum...
Re: IESG Response to Copyright appeal
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> May I know, how close to a "contribution to the public"; the GNU Free >> Documentation License is? See also >> http://gnux.vlsm.org/copyleft/fdl.txt > Not very. >From the preamble: "The purpose of this License is to make a manual, textbook, or other written document "free" in the sense of freedom: to assure everyone the effective freedom to copy and redistribute it, with or without modifying it, either commercially or noncommercially. Secondarily, this License preserves for the author and publisher a way to get credit for their work, while not being considered responsible for modifications made by others." I have no problem with that. However; since I am not a lawyer, I am just wondering if there are hidden catches that I am not aware of. > At least it's not as viral as the GPL, and they don't > require you (in section 3) to *personally* distribute sources for > 3 years if you ship binaries of GPL programs (which irked me no end > when building installable packages for AIX - even though I made *no* > source changes, I asked (and was told) that just pointing at ftp.gnu.org > for the source wasn't acceptable). You only need take "prudent steps" > for one year to ensure the place you point people stays there. Section 3 of GPL http://gnux.vlsm.org/copyleft/gpl.txt has three options, "a" (accompany with source code) , "b" (three years commitment to distribute), and "c" (providing pointers). So, what is the problem to choose one of them? regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- The Kappa likes getting cucumber --- Budum... Budum...
Re: IESG Response to Copyright appeal
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ietf-announce/message/167 > In doing this, you leave the ISOC copyright there, which asserts that the > ISOC has your permission to publish the document in the RFC archive, and > protects it from unauthorized modifications or claims. Doing so, according > to our counsel '...is as close to a "contribution to the public" that we > can get'. Dear honest lawyers, counsels, et. al.: May I know, how close to a "contribution to the public"; the GNU Free Documentation License is? See also http://gnux.vlsm.org/copyleft/fdl.txt regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- The Kappa likes getting cucumber --- Budum... Budum...
Re: Fwd: Indianz.com NEWS BRIEFS: APRIL 1, 2001
> Not having seen an RFC come over the transom yesterday or today, > here is an alternative. > http://216.218.205.86/april1.asp Are you sure? 1 April Special * RFC 3091 on Pi Digit Generation Protocol * RFC 3092 on Etymology of "Foo" * RFC 3093 on Firewall Enhancement Protocol --- * RFC 3091 on Pi Digit Generation Protocol http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3091.html This protocol is intended to provide the Pi digit generation service (PIgen), and be used between clients and servers on host computers. Typically the clients are on workstation hosts lacking local Pi support, and the servers are more capable machines with greater Pi calculation capabilities. The essential tradeoff is the use of network resources and time instead of local computational cycles. * RFC 3092 on Etymology of "Foo" http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3092.html Approximately 212 RFCs so far, starting with RFC 269, contain the terms `foo', `bar', or `foobar' as metasyntactic variables without any proper explanation or definition. This document rectifies that deficiency. * RFC 3093 on Firewall Enhancement Protocol http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3093.html Internet Transparency via the end-to-end architecture of the Internet has allowed vast innovation of new technologies and services [1]. However, recent developments in Firewall technology have altered this model and have been shown to inhibit innovation. We propose the Firewall Enhancement Protocol (FEP) to allow innovation, without violating the security model of a Firewall. With no cooperation from a firewall operator, the FEP allows ANY application to traverse a Firewall. Our methodology is to layer any application layer Transmission Control Protocol/User Datagram Protocol (TCP/UDP) packets over the HyperText Transfer Protocol (HTTP) protocol, since HTTP packets are typically able to transit Firewalls. This scheme does not violate the actual security usefulness of a Firewall, since Firewalls are designed to thwart attacks from the outside and to ignore threats from within. The use of FEP is compatible with the current Firewall security model because it requires cooperation from a host inside the Firewall. FEP allows the best of both worlds: the security of a firewall, and transparent tunneling thought the firewall. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- The Kappa likes getting cucumber --- Budum... Budum...
Re: Deja Vu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > How about 1 per year in North / South America, 1 per year in Asia / > Australasia and 1 per year in Europe / Africa ? And, what will be accomplished by this suggestion? And, what has been accomplished by the "GOER"s on the meetings recently anyway? Donald E. Eastlake 3rd wrote: > As long as about 2/3 of the IETF attendees are from North > America, 2/3 of the meetings should be in North America. I have no problem with that. But, if 2/3 of 2/3 are from the bay area, should this rule also apply? What's the point to have a meeting in a freezer/midwest anyway? Brian E Carpenter wrote: > One meeting a year outside the US seems fine to me. No meeting is fine to me too. Or perhaps parallel meetings in several region? Ben Hale wrote: > Lets hold the meetings in some of the poorer or more > developing countries. What for? The IETF meetings are obviously not "developing countries" friendly, and therefore fellows there who are interested in voluntary work should go somewhere else. There are obviously many other voluntary organizations that are more color friendly anyway. Keith Moore wrote: > Hmm. I thought the Internet was for everyone. Whoa! That is a marketing slogan from the big-pipe providers (and perhaps big router companies) for getting more $$$. No, the internet is only for the ones who can afford it and use it. Joe Aiello wrote: > What is this Internet thing I keep hearing so much about? INTERNET= Indomie Telur Kornet (Instant Noodle, Egg, and Corned meat :-). -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Blowfish, n (coup d'poisson) --- a secure blow job -
Re: Personal notes from the Minneapolis meeting
Jacob Palme wrote: > My personal notes from the IETF meeting in Minneapolis > last week can be found at > http://dsv.su.se/jpalme/ietf/ietf-mar-01-notes.html Here are some highlights (since some of the nroff systems are not "html ready" :^) -- Content Distribution: One speaker complained bitterly: There are several patents, suing each other, and making work complex for IETF standards work. The patent system is screwed up. People unreasonably get patents for well-known ideas and methods. Lawyers have unreasonable concepts of what is novel and patentable, causing much problems and stopping technical development and standards work. (notes from Professor Jacob Palme, Stockholm University and KTH Technical University http://dsv.su.se/jpalme/ietf/ietf-mar-01-notes.html per March 2001)
Re: Establishment of Temporary Sub-IP Area
Fred Baker wrote: > There has been some concern over the scope of the IETF sub-IP effort. This > is an attempt to help clarify the view of the IESG on a number of issues. > Suggestion: I believe that this (type of) message should be copied to the ietf-announce list. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Blowfish, n (coup d'poisson) --- a secure blow job -
Re: Mailing list software
"Henning G. Schulzrinne" wrote: > We're running a number of IETF mailing lists on our server here at > Columbia. Some of the lists have gotten a bit larger and more popular > than we anticipated; sendmail is groaning. Any suggestions for alternate > delivery software (for Solaris and/or Linux)? Anything less than 5000 subscribers can be happily handled by qmail http://www.qmail.org . Perhaps more is OK too. But, you might want to consider commercial softwares like HighPlanet, Postfix/Software.com, or the commercial version of Sendmail. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Blowfish, n (coup d'poisson) --- a secure blow job -
Re: rfc publication suggestions
Vernon Schryver wrote: > For "nroff guides" on your own systems, > try `man -k roff` and `man -k mdoc`. Script started on Fri Mar 16 17:37:39 2001 % hostname rmsbase.vlsm.org % /sbin/kernelversion 2.2 % man -k roff roff: nothing appropriate % man -f mdoc mdoc: nothing appropriate % exit exit Script done on Fri Mar 16 17:38:18 2001 > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=nroff+macros finds > 23,900 pages. This is exactly the problem: I could not find any Leslie-Lamport-quality-HOWTO-document for nroff. >> Who is still using this dino technology anyway? > Most RFC authors use that "dino technology," First of all, I define "dino technology" as something where the average age of its producers (not just users) constantly increases. Jon Crowcroft wrote: > (rhetorical question, dont answer that:-) Well, an eye for an eye, a rhetorical question for a rhetorical one :-). I am just wondering what you are going to do with your private video tapes. Keep them as is, or transfer them to VCDs, or transfer them to DVDs? Same question for QIC-150s, Reel tapes, etc. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Blowfish, n (coup d'poisson) --- a secure blow job -
Re: Easy Money!!!!
On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > You can earn $50,000 or more in the next 90 days sending e-mail. > Seem Impossible? Ah, great! I could pay the IETF meeting, plus first class air ticket, plus other accomodation. And sure, I will use the rest of the money for bleaching my skin like Michael Jackson. Oh yes, I will attend an nroff course. :-) regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Oops, I did it again... I am not that innocent... [Spears]
Re: rfc publication suggestions
Rosen, Brian wrote: > Of course a big problem is the decreasing number of > IETF people who know nroff, and even fewer that are fluent, > and even fewer who would, if they had a choice, choose it Vernon Schryver wrote: > No rocket science (but maybe some patience) is required to write nroff. > Thanks to groff, typesetting nroff has become free. No rocket science, but perhaps archaeology. In the early 1980s, a unix box (68ks, vaxen, et.al.) came with a multi-volume manuals, including an nroff guide. In this millennium, not all distros have nroff guides. Who is still using this dino technology anyway? regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Blowfish, n (coup d'poisson) --- a secure blow job -
Re: DNSng: where to discuss/get info?
Mohsen BANAN-Public wrote: > Did you follow the discussions that I initiated on > a similar set of topics on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] > mailing lists about two years ago? Nope, but what was the conclusion? Where (URL) is it archived? Basically, my question was because of IAB's assertion in RFC-2826 "IAB Technical Comment on the Unique DNS Root" ( http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2826.html ) > Bob Allisat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> followed up on that idea... I am not aware that he is interested in the technical aspect of DNS. > I am also interested in the answer to your question. >Rahmat> - is there any WG, or organization, or list, or whatever >Rahmat> which is actively discussing the TECHNICAL (not political) >Rahmat> aspect of how a new DNS scheme should be? Perhaps, we should discuss this in private. What I have in mind is somewhat of an "address book" that is publicly accessible, perhaps through an ordinary DNS. Since it is publicly accessible, it can be shared/adopted by others. But, still there will be a legal issue here. Since XYZZY lawyers believe that they are entitled to XYZZY.com, XYZZY.net, XYZZY.org, XYZZY.any.other.TLD, do they have right over the XYZZY definition in my private address book? regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Jangan,jangan,samakan;VLSM-TJT dengan yang lain! A.Rafiq
Re: Writing Internet Drafts on a Macintosh
>> Also, why isn't HTML an accepted format for Internet Drafts > just a sec. traditionally, we have this discussion every six months. > it has not been six months yet. And the poisson is due to start its five year cycle to discuss about the future format of an RFC. The last consensus (1996) was "let's wait five years :-). regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Don't cry for me, Nusantara;the truth is that I never...
HTML vs. TXT: let's compare!
Hello, let's compare: http://dmoz.org/Bookmarks/G/gaelle/RFC/Routing_and_Addressing/BGP/ and http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-chen-bgp-reference-01.txt Some fellow perhaps prefers the first one and some others may prefers the second one. Some may take aspirin, and some may eat chicken soup. Why not have both? regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Don't cry for me, Nusantara;the truth is that I never...
DNSng: where to discuss/get info?
Hello: Well, the current DNS was designed around 1983 by Mockapetris et. al. ( See also http://gnIETF.vlsm.org/127.txt ). AFAIK, it was based on assumptions like a "single root"/ "single person authority", a simple categorizing scheme (.edu, .gov, ...), etc. Unfortunately, nowadays, XYZZY lawyers believe that XYZZY is entitled to XYZZY.net, XYZZY.com, XYZZY.org, XYZZY.ALL-TLDs, etc. So the questions are: - why not design a new DNS scheme? - is there any WG, or organization, or list, or whatever which is actively discussing the TECHNICAL (not political) aspect of how a new DNS scheme should be? - for example, what is the technical problem if everyone is running hir own "address book"; so that "my-favorite-soda" or "soda" will be mapped to whatever favorite soda (Dr. Pepper for myself :-). - or, what is the technical problem, if creating about 40++ "alternate" TLDs like: "0", "1", ... "A", "B", "C", ... "Z", ".", .... Example: the classical ".com" will be mapped to TLD "m", etc. - is NameDroppers the answer? regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Mr.LOPA-LOPA... HAMtastic,MENKEHstic,YUSRILbis...|Shaggy
Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1)
General Question: - How to migrate? I have been using the "QWERTY" keyboard all the time. I am aware that it is not the best, but I am stuck. Jun'an Gao wrote: > 4. Each time the client end initiates a new connection it >will allocate a new IPv6 address. The allocation may >be done randomly, providing client anonymity. How are you going to route those random packets? regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Good bye hegemony - http://sapi.vlsm.org/DLL/linuxrouter
Re: STD-2 is obsolete
Joe Touch wrote: >> I was not aware that there was ever a proposed STD-1 I-D and/ >> or last call. > STDs are labels of existing standard RFCs which go through > the usual procedure. But, neither I was aware that there was ever an I-D and/or a last call for RFC-2600 or RFC-2700. >> Anyway, is it possible to declare (by whoever) >> the http://www.iana.org/numbers.htm as STD-2? Or, perhaps a >> mini RFC as STD-2 that informs where to get the current >> numbers? > The procedure would generally be to update RFC1700, > resubmit it, and _then_ have STD-2 point to that new RFC. > (something IANA would do) I believe this is a problem. Accurate information exists, but it can not be published because it is not in a traditional RFC format :-(. > As far as I know, the recent status is supposed to be > at the top of the RFC. > As to where to get them, that's already in rfc-index.txt > (which is in the same directory as the RFCs): Unfortunately, it is not so obvious (especially for the one who has no idea about the RFC-Editor mechanism) that rfc-index.txt exists. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Good bye hegemony - http://sapi.vlsm.org/DLL/linuxrouter
Re: STD-2 is obsolete
Joe Touch wrote: >> IANA can't change the status of an STD - that's an IESG action. >> If you think this matters, I would raise it with the latter. > Agreed. I was not aware that there was ever a proposed STD-1 I-D and/ or last call. Anyway, is it possible to declare (by whoever) the http://www.iana.org/numbers.htm as STD-2? Or, perhaps a mini RFC as STD-2 that informs where to get the current numbers? I also believe that more information should be added into an RFC: - where to get an RFC - where to get the recent status of an RFC It is sometimes very confusing for the internet community at large, to trace back the source of accurate information. PS, these following was cited from a standard /etc/services: -- # Note that it is presently the policy of IANA to assign a single well-known # port number for both TCP and UDP; hence, most entries here have two entries # even if the protocol doesn't support UDP operations. # Updated from RFC 1700, ``Assigned Numbers'' (October 1994). Not all ports # are included, only the more common ones. [...] # From ``Assigned Numbers'': #> The Registered Ports are not controlled by the IANA and on most systems #> can be used by ordinary user processes or programs executed by ordinary #> users. #> Ports are used in the TCP [45,106] to name the ends of logical #> connections which carry long term conversations. For the purpose of #> providing services to unknown callers, a service contact port is #> defined. This list specifies the port used by the server process as its #> contact port. While the IANA can not control uses of these ports it #> does register or list uses of these ports as a convienence to the #> community. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Good bye hegemony - http://sapi.vlsm.org/DLL/linuxrouter
STD-2 is obsolete
Joe Touch wrote: > It is a paradox to begin one standard by selectively omitting > current standards (e.g., RFC1122). I believe that that is called "making progress". Cited from section 4.20 of RFC-1336: "I think three factors contribute to the success of the Internet: 1) public documentation of the protocols, 2) free (or cheap) software for the popular machines, and 3) vendor independence." Thus, it is not "end-to-end-purity" or because the existence of any organization. Speaking of keeping standards, I am wondering why STD-2 is still RFC-1700, although the current version is kept by IANA at http://www.iana.org/numbers.htm . regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Good bye hegemony - http://sapi.vlsm.org/DLL/linuxrouter
Re: FAQ: The IETF+Censored list
Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: >The IETF+Censored mailing list I believe that that message itself does not comply BCP-45/RFC-3005. Furthermore, the filter itself is somehow out-of-date. http://www.alvestrand.no/cgi-bin/hta/ietf+censored-filters May I be listed in that filter anyway :^)? regrets, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org - Good bye hegemony - http://sapi.vlsm.org/DLL/linuxrouter
Re: Wall Street Journal: DNS is not secure
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL > > WASHINGTON -- Computer experts discovered a flaw in widely used > software that could let hackers hijack corporate and government Web > sites and steal sensitive e-mail. Instead of WSJ, you might want to refer to http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2001-02.html http://www.isc.org/products/BIND/bind-security.html Anyway, I have spend the whole day to fix zones, since the current BIND does not like "TXT RR" as it used to be :-(. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Gong Xi Fa Cai - Hong Bao Na Lai
Re: What happen to ip6.int ?
Bill Manning wrote: > ip6.int was pre ITU. http://www.itu.int/aboutitu/history/history.html > On 17 May 1865 after two and a half months of arduous > negotiations, the first International Telegraph Convention > was signed by the 20 participating countries and the > International Telegraph Union was set up to enable > subsequent amendments to this initial agreement to be > agreed upon. This marked the birth of the ITU. However, I recall during an IPNG presentation in 1995, that no IPv6 reverse RR has been decided. Therefore, I must have missed something... regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Gong Xi Fa Cai - Hong Bao Na Lai
Re: What happen to ip6.int ?
B. Elzem Özgürce wrote: > can anyone tell me what is ipv6.int? please :-)) (shortly also i ll search) You can start by reading http://www.iab.org/iab/DOCUMENTS/statement-on-infrastructure-domains.txt Anyway, I could not recall the genesis of ipv6.int. Perhaps: in the beginning, everything was void. Then J.B. Postel created in-addr.arpa which was good. Then, in the gTLD-MoU age with ITU, ipv6.int was proposed... regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Gong Xi Fa Cai - Hong Bao Na Lai
Re: What happen to ip6.int ?
Patrik Fältström wrote: >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ymbk-ip6-arpa-delegation-00.txt >> [...] > See http://www.iab.org/iab/DOCUMENTS/statement-on-infrastructure-domains.txt I would like to suggest -- just like in RFC-3026 -- to add to the reference of draft-ymbk-ip6-arpa-delegation-00.txt: X. IAB, "IAB Technical Comment on the Unique DNS Root", RFC 2826, May 2000. Since we never know who are going to read an RFC, how about to add the URL tag to reference (e.g. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2826.txt ) regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Gong Xi Fa Cai - Hong Bao Na Lai
What happen to ip6.int ?
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ymbk-ip6-arpa-delegation-00.txt > This document discusses the need for delegation of the IP6.ARPA DNS > zone, and specifies a plan for the technical operation thereof. Hello: Does anyone know what happen to ip6.int ? regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Gong Xi Fa Cai - Hong Bao Na Lai
Re: New Internet Service
Get2NIC wrote: >ZiplogMail-Free Spam & Virus-Proof E-mail Accounts. ROFL PS: - if Major Domo knew how to cope this, he would be General Domo by now :^) -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Gong Xi Fa Cai - Hong Bao Na Lai
Re: about RFC2178
BTW, The IETF-Announce script is still referring to "isi.edu" instead of "rfc-editor.org" Eg, RFC 3038 Title: VCID Notification over ATM link for LDP Author(s): K. Nagami, Y. Katsube, N. Demizu, H. Esaki, [...] I-D Tag:draft-ietf-mpls-vcid-atm-05.txt URL:ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3038.txt ^^^^^^ regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- Aku ini si gembala sapi... oie... http://sapi.vlsm.org
Re: IETF mailing list archive problems
"Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" wrote: > I suggest trying ftp to <ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-mail-archive/ietf> or > <ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-mail-archive/ietf-announce>. In general, > when looking for stuff at organizations that predate the web, trying > ftp is a good idea. Yet other alternate archives: http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-announce http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-last_call http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-protocol_action http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-document_action http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-i-d_action http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-pre2000 http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-rfc http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-wg_action http://www.egroups.com/messages/ietf-wg_review regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- Aku ini si gembala sapi... oie... http://sapi.vlsm.org
Re: Why the out of office messages aren't an example of misconfiguration.
On 29 Dec 2000: > I hate to have to give a basic lesson on this stuff on, of all places, Um... There exists concepts like: - mailing list maintainer - mailing list policy - unsubscribe a mailing list member Therefore, the maintainer should JUST DO IT! PS: As a maintainer, I have been using majordomo, ezmlm, as well as eGroups; eGroups is the best! happy y2k++ -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org Oops, I did it again... I am not that innocent... [Spears]
Re: What is the IETF? -- A note of caution
James Seng/Personal wrote: >> - what should those "corporate representative" do? >> - where should they go? > The point is you dont, not in IETF. I have no problem with that, i.e. that the IETF is for individuals. But, that does not answer the issue of what should they do. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- Aku ini si gembala sapi... oie... http://sapi.vlsm.org
Re: What is the IETF? -- A note of caution
Hello: (I copy this to the poisson list, since I am somehow blocked from the IETF list). I am fully understand what your concern is. But, - what should those "corporate representative" do? - where should they go? best regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - VLSM-TJT - http://rms46.vlsm.org --- the father of internet (al gore) for IAB -- NOMCOM2000 John W Noerenberg II wrote: > As a representative of of one of the co-hosts for this meeting, I am > equally gratified and terrorized to have the distinction hosting the > largest IETF meeting to date (I fully expect this meeting to be > surpassed soon). Fred's summary of the diversity of the IETF was > truly impressive. > > But in retrospect, one thing he said bothered me greatly. He > mentioned there were representatives of some five hundred different > organizations at this meeting. That too is impressive. But it's > that word "representative" I find disquieting. > > We are here not as corporate representatives, but as individuals > committed to building the best Internet we can. Becoming part of a > working group means you leave your company badge at the door. As the > Internet has become more and more a commercial place, and the setting > for business and commerce, the pressure to bend the way the Internet > works to one's particular advantage at the expense of others > increases. > > This is not part of our heritage. It is not part of our Tao. We > come together because the Internet belongs to no one country, or > organization. Rather it exists for all. We can look forward to a > Net which not only spans the Earth, but gives every person in every > country, the opportunity and the means to learn from any other > regardless of their home, their beliefs or their physical > capabilities. > > It is a wonderful thing. And we must remember it is our > responsibility to preserve and enhance it for those who will come > after. > > -- > > john noerenberg > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >-- >If we admire the Net, should not a burden of proof fall on those >who would change the basic assumptions that brought it about in >the first place? >-- David Brin, "The Transparent Society", 1998 >--
The RFC-Editor and IANA (part II)
Quoted from another thread: However, we believe that there is a fairly general understanding among IAB, ICANN, and US DoC that the IAB could, indeed, transfer the portions of the IANA efforts that relate to IETF work elsewhere if that were necessary or desirable. I like this bold statement very much, and I believe that this is the way that the IAB should go! And, I assume that it was not a humorous intentional. It is still not clear, however, why both IANA and the RFC-Editor have never explicitly acknowledged that they were chartered by the IAB. If the funding of the RFC Editor function is $1,295,517 and it produces 1300 RFCs, the production cost of one RFC will be about $1000. This is equivalent to 10 third world man month. No complain, since this is funded by Uncle Sam's tax payers or its derivative. (Unfortunately, parts of ICANN and regional *NIC registries funds will come from the third world). References: * http://ittf.vlsm.org/ietf/164.txt * http://ittf.vlsm.org/ietf/00/1.txt * http://gtm.vlsm.org/in-i-iana1.html -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - - You have to let me go, I just wanna tell you! - 5IVE INVINCIBLE -
Best Current DNS Pracitices and our dogfood
In regard of an engineer salary: > all these oh so brilliant folk on the anti-cacheing crusade > should be sentenced to live in a significantly less privileged > country for a year, where dialup ppp costs per megabyte of > international traffic and an engineer's salary is $100-200 > per month. we are spoiled brats. I know many fellows that even earn less than $100 :-(. In regards of DNS: > Non-authoritative answer: > ietf.orgnameserver = ns.ietf.org > ietf.orgnameserver = ns.CNRI.Reston.VA.US > Authoritative answers can be found from: > ns.ietf.org internet address = 132.151.1.19 > ns.CNRI.Reston.VA.USinternet address = 132.151.1.1 > rfc2182 ignored, both servers on same backbone, probably > in same site. This problem sounds very familiar. So, it also happen in a more privileged country with high paid engineers? Ah, what a relief! Anyway, I would like to know more about what the real best current DNS practices are (no theory please!). Especially, on how do fellows practicing RFC-2181 (Clarifications to the DNS Specification), RFC-2182 (Selection and Operation of Secondary DNS Servers), dan RFC-2317 (Classless IN-ADDR.ARPA delegation). For example; how many run a periodic dnswalk; how to handle lamers; where to keep the record of secondary contacts; is misusing CNAME a problem or not; how often it happen, the case where nobody remembers where the archive is; etc. Please send me comments and especially URLs. I will add the summary at: http://rms46.vlsm.org/00-i-12.html PS: - I was always wondering for what was the Source Address. Now, I have got clues! But, I am still wondering on why a 32 bit (or 128 bit) low level unique identifier is needed. Does it mean that the Klingons, Ferengis, and Vulcan have to renumber their advanced network if they join the FCANN (Federation Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers)? PPS: - OK, it is 20 days too late, but try :-) http://Ladies.and.Gentlemen.This.is.indeed.the.longest.domain.name.that.is.allowed.by.the.current.BIND.version.If.you.can.not.access.this.website--you.should.contact.your.proxy.administrator.Or.you.can.also.try.the.short.version.of.this.domain.ie.long.vlsm.org -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - - You have to let me go, I just wanna tell you! - 5IVE INVINCIBLE -
Need Clue: What for are I-Ds?
Hello: For a while I have put an IETF-Announce archive that can be accessed through http://ittf.vlsm.org/announce.html This archive is split into several categories. For example: I-D Action http://www.eGroups.com/messages/ietf-i-d_action/ Last Call http://www.eGroups.com/messages/ietf-last_call/ Protocol Action http://www.eGroups.com/messages/ietf-protocol_action/ Document Action http://www.eGroups.com/messages/ietf-document_action/ However, I am still confused about what to do with an I-D since section 2.2 of BCP-9/1996 (the Internet Standard Process 3.00) and section 8 of BCP-25/1998 (IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures) do not say much about this issue. 1. Where to post a comment? Should I send it to an author, all authors, the IETF list, the IESG, the RFC-Editor, or what? Or should I wait until a last call? 2. What for is a Last Call ? I believe that section 8 of BCP-25 is widely accepted by the community: "It is important to note that a Last-Call is intended as a brief, final check with the Internet community, to make sure that no important concerns have been missed or misunderstood. The Last-Call should not serve as a more general, in-depth review". Therefore, what will be the point to review an I-D at the Last Call stage? 3. What is the point to argue in the IETF list? Section 3 of BCP-25 hinted that someone (the chair) should periodically post a summary, and another one (the document writer) should write down something. Since no one (publicly) summarized the IETF list and I-D drafts are seldomly written based on the discussion; what is the point to participate in a > 100 email burst discussion? 4. How to recognize the intention of the I-D author(s)? An I-D has not always sufficent clues of the author(s) intention. How to know that an I-D is on Standard Track? (PS. AFAIK, individuals can submit I-Ds for an Standard Track). thanks, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - - Bye bye Redmond! Next stop: San Jose... http://linux.vlsm.org --
Mbone question: the multicast addresses
Hello: Sorry, I could not find an answer or a pointer through http://www.ietf.org/meetings/multicast.html My provider said that it supports mbone, but only enable it on demand for specific addresses. Therefore, could anyone please inform me the multicast group addresses of the coming 47th IETF? thanks, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - 2000:Year of the Information Snooper Highway - CathyGuisewite 25Feb
Re: history
Jon Crowcroft:
> see
> http://www-mice.cs.ucl.ac.uk/multimedia/misc/tcp_ip/
> for a slightly incomplete archive of it all
> i couldn't find any other archive but if someone does have
> it, let me know and i'll delete mine and point at theirs...
Hopefully, there will be permanent URLs for those archives.
> so there used to be this single file we'd all FTP from ISI with
> the hosts.txt listing of name/addresses -
I recall that even in 1988, a.cs.uiuc.edu or uiucdcs (then a
VAX-11/750) did "gethostfromnic" once or twice a week.
PS: It is interesting to note that in 1986, a CISCO IP
gateway(1-4 way) that supports IP/TCP and V.35 cost $7950.
regards,
--
- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ -
- struct {char unstable;void knowledge;float hopes;double income;};
Re: TCP Encapsulation within TCP
Hello: A couple of days ago I have posted a query for **ONLINE DOCUMENTS** of practical TCP Encapsulation within TCP. Thanks for everyone who has replied in private. I am aware that someone in Harvard was doing it, however, I would like to know what is currently under development or already on the shelf. The issue itself was inspired by the recent DoS attack. So, basically it is about how a "small Mom and Pop ISP in the developing country" can have some control over its low speed upstream link. I was thinking of using a TCP window, since the characteristics of that technology are somewhat already known. Thus, the provider might have some control over how much SYNC packets it will accept, priority packets, filtering, etc., at the other end of the link. Someone has suggested to look on RSVP documents. However, I think that RSVP is too complicated. Someone has suggested to look on IPSEC documents. While security is desirable, it is not the main point. However, I believe that the ssh utility can be used for establishing the virtual links. Again, thanks for everyone who has replied my prior email! regards, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - Here we are,poised on the precipice of suicide slope-Calvin 20Feb89
Re: 1601bis -03: Still Vague
Hello: First of all, it is not over until the RFC-Editor sings :^. Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote: >> The role descriptions of section 2 remains vague. Thus, the relation >> with IANA and the RFC Editor will remain vague. > It seems quite clear to me. You might want to suggest alternative wording > that you think is clearer. It is not about wordsmithing, but more about the fundamentals of section 2. Sub-section 2.1 is about "architectural oversight in more detail". However, it is not clear on how to measure the effectiveness of that sub-section. Thus, it will be not so easy for a NomCom member to evaluate the performance of the IAB. The only clue is perhaps the IAB's long queue of work-in-progress. For example, 1601bis has been more than 4 years in queue. Therefore, the nature of revising 1601bis must not be easy. Nonetheless, there will be no organizational improvement until the IAB is willing continuously to improve itself. See also "Managing The Non-Profit Organization -- Practices and Principles" (Peter F. Drucker, 1990) for more details. >> "The RFC Editor is chartered by the Internet Society (ISOC) >>and the Federal Network Council (FNC)" > That might have been true at one point, and things have changed. > What's the problem with that? Not much, just $1,295,517 regards, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - Here we are,poised on the precipice of suicide slope-Calvin 20Feb89
1601bis -03: Still Vague
Hello: Just a quick comment on 1601bis version 3 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iab-rfc1601bis-03.txt It is not clear on why the IAB does not want to take time for a retreat/ self-assessment of what really works and what not. It seems that the IAB still does not want to empower itself :-(. The role descriptions of section 2 remains vague. Thus, the relation with IANA and the RFC Editor will remain vague. No wonder, if the RFC Editor once has claimed: "The RFC Editor is chartered by the Internet Society (ISOC) and the Federal Network Council (FNC)" (http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc-editor/what-is-rfc-editor.html) OK, it's time for an Oolong Tea Party :^, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - Here we are,poised on the precipice of suicide slope-Calvin 20Feb89
TCP Encapsulation within TCP
Hello: Apology if this following sounds a little bit trivia. I looking for online documents about practical TCP Encapsulation within TCP implementation. I have already tried without luck the http://www.normos.org/ , http://www.altavista.org , FAQ - comp.protocols.tcp-ip, as well as the holy rfc-index.txt. What I have in mind is splitting a virtual point to point link into several queues with TCP windows. What I mean with virtual link is that there might be several physical hubs between the points. Each encapsulated TCP window will contain one or more real TCP packets that are compressed and encrypted. For example, a link might be split into four queues. One for Non Maskable/Priority Traffic, one for Small and Medium Packets, one for Large Packets, and one for forwarding no priority packets (e.g. "alt.*" traffic). Hopefully, someone has already implemented something similar. regards, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim http://rms46.vlsm.org -- OSI: Same day service in a nanosecond world --- Interop T-shirt(vJ)
Re: Need Clues: procmail configuration for IETF-Announce
Valdis Kletnieks wrote: > I use something like this: > [...] Comrades: thank for all replies that I have received. I still need clues on how to rewrite the email headers so that errors do not bounce to unwanted destinations. The split of the IETF Announce list prototype is now available at http://ittf.vlsm.org/announce.html It is provided "as is" with no liability. regards, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - Here we are,poised on the precipice of suicide slope-Calvin 20Feb89
Need Clues: procmail configuration for IETF-Announce
Hello: For the first time in my life, last weekend I read the fine procmail manual. I need some clues on how to configure procmail for splitting the IETF-Announce list; especially separating the I-D ACTION part. If you have one, would you please send me the procmail part of filtering IETF-Announce? See also: http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-rfc/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-wg_action/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-wg_review/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-announce/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-document_action/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-protocol_action/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-last_call/ http://www.egroups.com/group/ietf-i-d_action/ regards, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - What've I got to do, when sorry seems to be the hardest word-John81
Re: IETF Adelaide and interim meetings for APPS WGs
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd: > The primary concern in the IETF is producing good protocols. I believe that the IETF model -- for better or for worse -- is a good thing for developing countries, compared to a membership organization like ISOC. Having said, it does not mean that organizational improvement should be banned. P.S. the aging board and steering group members reminds me to the late stagnated Soviet Union empire... :^). regards, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - - DOTCOM... coma coma banana fana coma dotcom... -- the DNS game --
Re: 1601bis: The Charter of IAB
John C Klensin wrote: > My, my, do I love being quoted out of context on a comment that > was made four years ago, and was intended as humorous rather > than a serious comment on the process. Sorry, I was not aware that an email to an IETF WG list with a subject "The appeals process and the IAB" and starts with "... have discussed with a few people..." was intended as humorous. Anyway, let's agree to disagree: 1. I am strongly opposing the current 1601bis, but who cares anyway? There is no way to make an appeal, and therefore, I believe it is a WIN-WIN situation: most likely that charter will be approved, and I will save ISOC membership fee. 2. I have no problem with the informality at the WG and IESG level, including sending humorous emails to a list :^). However, I believe that the IAB serves as a shim between that informality and its formal umbrella organization (ISOC). 3. I believe that the IESG is doing fine at its level except it should stop signing treaties and MoUs with other organizations. But, I do not believe that the IESG needs a super-IESG (i.e. the current IAB) for technical oversight purpose. Even if the IESG needs one, an expert advisory panel could sever that purpose. 4. I believe that the IAB should deal with things that the IESG is not interested anyway, including to deal with the formality of the *REAL* community. 5. Case closed. regrets, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - - Always select ShutDown from the StartMenu - M$Windows after crash
Re: 1601bis: The Charter of IAB
Brian E Carpenter wrote: > I can read your words, but I really can't understand your concerns. > You seem to be worrying about dragons that I can't see. Happy New > Year, anyway. Hm... your reply is exactly my concern! Your answer is just based on "can not understand" and not based on any document or past history. Therefore, I would like to see more things in written. Is this by the way how the board in handling appeals? Who is the current IANA and RFC-Ed (chair/head/whatever)? I also believe what Klensin wrote is still valid: .. [... 22 Feb 1996 ... skipping voting out of existence, fine lunches and dinners, and irresolvable controversy pronouncements...] For questions of process, there is really a jury problem, not a technical or architectural expertise one. The IAB membership may have no special competence to make decisions on process matters and, if they were involved in the initial proposals in any way, they may be contaminated relative to making fair choices. I suggest that, for process questions, the right appeals body is a jury-like group that is chosen exactly the way the Nomcomm is chosen -- volunteers from the IETF participant pool and then at random, with no sitting IAB or IESG (or, I'd think, ISOC Trustees) members permitted to volunteer. I don't have an opinion as to whether we pick an appeals panel for a year just in case we need them or pick them only when a sufficient process appeal arises. It is not clear to me that it makes much difference -- except that, if they were picked on demand, we might just take the attendance list from the last few meetings and draw people from it on an "attendance subjects one to the risk on volunteering" basis. That has some drawbacks but some appeal. For the technical error questions, it is still not clear to me that IAB is the right appeals body, especially if they were active in formulating the position under appeal or an alternate to it. A randomly-chosen jury might still work, but might well not have the right technical expertise. As one possibility, we could move toward a formalized blue-ribbon review and mediation panel, with members of that panel being chosen by IESG, the WG leadership, and the individual or group launching the appeal. If it was appropriate to populate that panel with IAB members, that would be fine, but the review itself would not be an IAB responsibility. If the panel didn't behave fairly, that becomes a procedural question, and the appeals board outlined above takes over. It seems that the only thing that I can do is keeping records on who's who were on the board (+when), plus who were the nomcom who had elected them. Let the Vulcans, Klingons, and Ferengis make the final judgements in the next millennium. tabe, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - - Always select ShutDown from the StartMenu - M$Windows after crash
SUMMARY: flooding and spoofing attacks
Hello: I try to summarize about what is going on. Please let me know if I miss something. I will put this later into http://ittf.vlsm.org Clue alert... the recent attacks were not TCP SYN Floods (Warfield). - Place to discuss: NANOG (The North American Network Operators' Group) Milis: http://www.nanog.org/mailinglist.html - RFCs 2267 Network Ingress Filtering: Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Address Spoofing http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2267.txt "There is no assumption implied that RFC2267 filtering is needed -- it is required. What good is it if one or two or 300 people do it, and another 157,000 do not? (Ferguson)" "... while there are certainly clueless ISPs out there, I suspect that on the average they're more clueful about the net than the typical end site (Bellovin)." 2350 Expectations for Computer Security Incident Response http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2350.txt 2502 Limitations of Internet Protocol Suite for Distributed Simulation in the Large Multicast Environment http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2502.txt 2644 Changing the Default for Directed Broadcasts in Routers http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2644.txt - Further references: http://xforce.iss.net/alerts/advise40.php3 http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2000-01.html - Analysis of TFN (Tribe Flood Network): http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/misc/tfn.analysis http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/misc/trinoo.analysis http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/misc/stacheldraht.analysis - Craig Huegen's on minimizing the effects of DoS attacks: http://users.quadrunner.com/chuegen/smurf.cgi - Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) News Flash, http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/newsflash.html - Dave Dittrich's analysis of the recent DDoS attack tools. http://www.washington.edu/People/dad/ - NIPC (National Infrstructure Protection Center), TRINOO/Tribal Flood Net/tfn2k stuff: http://www.fbi.gov/nipc/trinoo.htm - Handling A Distributed Denial of Service Trojan Infection: Step-by-Step. http://www.sans.org/y2k/DDoS.htm - Internet Security Advisories http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/advisory.html http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/22.html http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/sec_incident_response.shtml http://www.cisco.com/public/cons/isp/documents/IOSEssentialsPDF.zip - Know your enemy: Script Kiddies http://www.enteract.com/~lspitz/enemy.html - Flow Logs and Intrusion Detection at the Ohio State University http://www.usenix.org/publications/login/1999-9/osu.html - Achtung LAWyers! http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB2211S0014 - The size of the internet: 72,000,000 domains/hosts. http://www.isc.org/ds/ - Sources (tararengkyu ka): Steve Bellovin Paul Ferguson Valdis Kletnieks April Marine Michael H. Warfield tabe, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - - Always select ShutDown from the StartMenu - M$Windows after crash
Re: 1601bis: The Charter of IAB
Sets Internet Standards, 2) Manages the RFC publication process, 3) Reviews the operation of the IETF and IRTF, 4) Performs strategic planning for the Internet, identifying long-range problems and opportunities, 5) Acts as an international technical policy liaison and representative for the Internet community, and 6) Resolves technical issues which cannot be treated within the IETF or IRTF frameworks. .. regards, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - - Da da da ich lieb dich nicht du liebst mich nicht aha -- TRIO82 -
Re: fragmentation?
Hello: > If you have not seen Dave Clark's RFC on reassembly, you have > missed something. Do you need an RFC #? It was one of the famous > "Dave Clark 5" RFCs, somewhere in the later 800s as I remember. 0815 IP datagram reassembly algorithms. D.D. Clark. Jul-01-1982. (Format: TXT=14575 bytes) (Status: UNKNOWN) See also http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0815.txt Gong Xi Fa Cai, Hong Bao Na Lai (=a prosperous millennium :-), -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - - Da da da ich lieb dich nicht du liebst mich nicht aha -- TRIO82 -
1601bis: The Charter of IAB
with the prior Charter - refer to RFC-1160 for historical details 6. Acknowledgments - include a list of all prior IAB's chairs 7. References - BCP 8 - BCP 9 - BCP 10 - RFC 1160 - RFC 1336 - RFC 1358 - RFC 1601 #include -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim -- VLSM-TJT -- http://rms46.vlsm.org/ - - PCI Bus, VESA-L Bus, ISA Bus, VME Bus, S100 Bus, Charlotte 71 Bus
NomCom Artifacts
Hello: Just in case interested, there are some NomCom related artifacts (1992-2000) at: http://gnIETF.vlsm.org/#NomCom regards, -- -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim --- -- OSI: Same day service in a nanosecond world --- Interop T-shirt(vJ)
IETF Working Group, Chair, and RFC Trivia
Hello: An update file of WG names, Chairs, and RFC produced/evaluated by WGs is available at: WG Names and Chairs: http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf-wg.txt RFC Products: http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf-prod.txt Those are "guesstimate" only with no accuracy warranty. It is assumed that if it exists in 1990 and 1999, that the WG exists continuously from 1990 to 1999. Same for WG chairs. Nonetheless, it gives me an idea about how a WG archive is supposed to be, just in case RFC-2418 (Working Group Guidelines) is going to be updated. The WGs that have been "rediscovered" are as following: - 8< - ZCZC F.31 Applications (app) acap, calsh, cnrp, conneg, dasl, deltav, drums, ediint, fax, ftpext, http, impp, ipp, ldapext, ldup, lsma, madman, msgtrk, nntpext, printmib, schema, tn3270e, trade, urlreg, urn, usefor, webdav, wrec. 822ext*, asid*, edi*, imap*, mimemhs*, mhtml*, netdata*, netfax*, nntp*, notary*, npp*, oda*, osids*, smtpext*, telnet*, tip*, x400ops*. General (gen) poisson. poised*, poised95*. Internet (int) atommib, dhc, dnsind, frnetmib, ifmib, ion, ip1394, ipcdn, ipfc, ipngwg, ipvbi, l2tpext, pppext, svrloc, zeroconf. appleip*, atm*, cip*, fddi*, ipatm*, iplpdn*, mmb*, mpsnmp*, mtudisc*, pktway*, ppp*, rdisc*, rreq*, smds*, st2*. IP Next Generation (ipng) <--> int(<1993,>1996) ale*, catnip*, ipae*, pip*, sip*, sipp*, tpix*, tuba*. Network Management (mgt) --> ops acct*, allerman*, charmib*, chassis*, decnetiv*, ethermib*, fddimib*, hostmib*, modemmgt*, msi*, oim*, rdbmsmib*, snanau*, snmp*, snmpv2*, transmib*, trmon*, trunkmib*, upsmib*, x25mib*. Operations and Management (ops) 2000, aaa, adslmib, agentx, bmwg, bridge, disman, dnsop, entmib, grip, hubmib, mboned, nasreq, ngtrans, policy, ptopomib, radius, rmonmib, roamops, rps, snmpv3, tewg. bgpdepl*, check*, cidrd*, gisd*, netstat*, njm*, noop*, opstat*, ucp*. OSI Integration osigen*, osinsap*, osix400*, osix500*. Routing (rtg) bgmp, dlswmib, gsmp, idmr, idr, isis, manet, mobileip, mospf, mpls, msdp, ospf, pim, rip, snadlc, udlr, vrrp. bgp*, idpr*, ipidrp*, iwg*, orwg*, pdnrout*, ripv2*, rolc*, sdr*. Service Applications (sap) --> int dns*, mhsds*, thinosi*, tnfs*. Security (sec) aft, cat, openpgp, dnssec, idwg, ipsec, otp, pkix, secsh, smime, spki, stime, tls, wts, xmldsig. aac*, cipso*, ident*, ipauth*, pem*, saag*, snmpsec*, spwg*. Transport (tsv) avt, diffserv, ecm, enum, intserv, ippm, iptel, issll, malloc, megaco, mmusic, nat, nfsv4, oncrpc, pint, pilc, rap, rmt, rsvp, rtfm, sigtran, sip, spirits, tcpimpl, tcpsat, tsvwg. dfs*, dns*, tcplw*. User Services Area (usv) <-- Host fyiup, run, uswg, weird. disi*, iafa*, ids*, iiir*, isn*, iup*, mimecont*, nir*, nisi*, noctool2*, shr*, ssh*, trainmat*, uri*, userdoc, userdoc2*, userglos*, wnils*. - 8< - F.31 ---------------- -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim VLSM-TJT -- http://www.vlsm.org/rms46/ - - Get your own free Ph.D. degree from UCLS - http://ucls.vlsm.org -
Re: IETF Trivia
Robert Moskowitz wrote: >>Jan 9, 1996: Robert Moskowitz participated the IAB's Teleconference >> from a plan (flight number ?). > Ho boy, my 15 in of fame! FYI, an update of the list is available at http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf.txt Most parts are *still* in English. But that is subject to change. Yet other underconstruction WG lists are available at http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf-prod.txt (RFC list) http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf-wg.txt(WG chair list) of these following WGs: Applications (app) acap, calsh, cnrp, conneg, dasl, deltav, drums, ediint, fax, ftpext, http, impp, ipp, ldapext, ldup, lsma, madman, msgtrk, nntpext, printmib, schema, tn3270e, trade, urlreg, urn, usefor, webdav, wrec. edi*, imap*, notary*, osids*, telnet*, x400ops*. General (gen) poisson. poised*, poised95*. Internet (int) atommib, dhc, dnsind, frnetmib, ifmib, ion, ip1394, ipcdn, ipfc, ipngwg, ipvbi, l2tpext, pppext, svrloc, zeroconf. atm*, iplpdn*, st2*. IP Next Generation (ipng) --> int catnip*, pip*, sip*, sipp*, tpix*, tuba*. Network Management (mgt) --> ops charmib*, decnetiv*, fddimib*, hostmib*, modemmgt*, snanau* snmpv2*, trmon*, trunkmib*, upsmib*, x25mib*. Operations and Management (ops) 2000, aaa, adslmib, agentx, bmwg, bridge, disman, dnsop, entmib, grip, hubmib, mboned, nasreq, ngtrans, policy, ptopomib, radius, rmonmib, roamops, rps, snmpv3, tewg. bgpdepl*, gisd*, njm*, noop*. Routing (rtg) bgmp, dlswmib, gsmp, idmr, idr, isis, manet, mobileip, mospf, mpls, msdp, ospf, pim, rip, snadlc, udlr, vrrp. bgp*, idpr*, ipidrp*, mobileip*, ripv2*, rolc*, sdr*. Service Applications (sap) --> int dns*, thinosi*. Security (sec) aft, cat, openpgp, dnssec, idwg, ipsec, otp, pkix, secsh, smime, spki, stime, tls, wts, xmldsig. aac*, saag*, pem*. Transport (tsv) avt, diffserv, ecm, enum, intserv, ippm, iptel, issll, malloc, megaco, mmusic, nat, nfsv4, oncrpc, pint, pilc, rap, rmt, rsvp, rtfm, sigtran, sip, spirits, tcpimpl, tcpsat, tsvwg. User Services Area (usv) fyiup, run, uswg, weird. 822ext*, iafa*, ids*, iiir*, isn*, mimecont*, mimemhs*, nir*, nisi*, nntp*, trainmat*, uri*, userdoc2*, wnils*. regards, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim VLSM-TJT -- http://www.vlsm.org/rms46/ - - 3705, 3720, 3725, 3745, 2216, 12000 GSR: I survived SNA (m/tic) -
Reengineering the IETF Information System
Hello: I would like to suggest that the coming RFC-2600 will be the last STD-1 in RFC form. The RFC publication system -- invented by graduated students, developed with the 1970s technology -- should sooner or later be fading away. Therefore, it would be better to maintain a up to the minute standard list. Having said, it is still not clear about who is in charge of monitoring the maturity of the Internet Standard Process after the 1992 new world order. It is not the IAB anymore, however is it the IESG or the Area Director(s) or is it the RFC Editor(s) ? Second, STD-2 has already unofficially evolved. So why not obsoleting RFC-1700 and replace it to http://www.iana.org/numbers.html ? Third, yet another "living document" is FYI-17 "The Tao" which is currently still RFC-1718, but http://www.ietf.org/tao.html is more up to date. tabe, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim VLSM-TJT -- http://www.vlsm.org/rms46/ - - My PC is worm. I think our firewall is acting up - Dilbert's Boss
IETF Working Group Chairs Trivia
Hello: As a complementary to the IETF Trivia: http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf.txt here is a preliminary draft of an IETF Working Group Chairs list: http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf-wg.txt Yes, it is far from complete. But thank you for asking :^) ! However, please give comments about its structure. tararengkyu, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim VLSM-TJT -- http://www.vlsm.org/rms46/ - - Notonogoro? Notobidurr. - 00112233445566 DUL-002: IETF WG Trivia $Revision: 1.2 $ $Date: 1999/10/21 08:00:14 $ ;;; All Rights Reversed, All Wrongs will be Reengineered ;;; Provided AS-IS! Liability? What is liability? Kepale lu-lah! ;;; Compiler: Abdul Latip Sosroatmodjo Kertokusumo (dullatip) ;;; Omar Bakry School of Management ;;; Universe Centra Le Sahara (UCLS) ;;; Jabal Acacus (Silicon Valley), Ghat, Sahara. ;;; URL: http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf-wg.txt ;;; COMMENTS: please mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED];;; == ZCZC-F31-START-IETF-WG-TRIVIA- A Karl Auerbach poised95(1995-1996) B C Stephen "Steve" D. Crocker poised(1992-1994) D E Pat Egencalsh(-1999-) F G H E. Hardie conneg(-1999-) Erik Huizer poised95(1995-1996), poisson(1997-1999-) I J K L M Dave Marvit impp(-1999-) Robert "Bob" Moskowitz calsh(-1999-) N O P Q R S Vijay Saraswat impp(-1999-) Bernhard Stockman poised95(1995-1996) T U V W X Z Applications (app): calsh, conneg, impp General (gen): poised, poised95, poisson calsch -1999- Calendaring and Scheduling conneg -1999- Content Negotiation impp-1999- Instant Messaging and Presence Protocol poised 1992-1994 Process for Organization of Internet Standards poised951995-1996 Process for Organization of Internet Standards 95 poisson 1996-1999- Process for Organization of Internet StandardS ONgoing -F31-END-IETF-WG-TRIVIA--
Re: IETF Trivia
"Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" wrote: > I think a historic list of who was what when would be intersting and > useful, at least for nominations committees. Particularly useful > would be who had been a WG chair, but that would be a tremendous > amount of work to compile... I will think about that. Anyway, the IETF Trivia update is now available (I include only the NOMCOM part): DUL-001: IETF Trivia $Revision: 1.5 $ $Date: 1999/10/11 03:00:04 $;;; URL: http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf.txt;;; COMMENTS: please mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ;;; NOMCOM: Nomination Committee BCP-10 ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/bcp/bcp10.txt Chair 1992 - 1993: Jeff Case Erik Huizer (IESG liaison) 1993 - 1994: Fred Baker 1994 - 1995: John Curran(30/10) volunteers: Marshall Rose, Fred Baker, Tony Genovese, Paul Traina, Roxana Bradescu, Greg Ruth, Peter S. Ford, Michael Mealling, Steven Waldbusser, Charlie Perkins. 1995 - 1996: Guy T. Almes Harald T. Alvestrand (IESG liaison) Bob Moskowitz(IAB liaison) Donald Eastlake, Bob Steen, Mark Prior, Ned Freed. 1996 - 1997: Geoff Houston Joyce K. Reynolds(IESG liaison) Radia Perlman(IAB liaison) Christian Huitema(ISOC liaison) Guy T. Almes (Ex. NOMCOM chair) Jim Bound, Matt Crawford, Phill Gross, Bob Hinden, Dorian Kim, Bill Manning, Marshall Rose, Mike StJohns, Glen Zorn. 1997 - 1998: Mike St. Johns Geoff Houston (Ex. NOMCOM chair) Rik Drummond, John Boudreaux, Steve Hole, Bernard Aboba, Lixia Zhang, Avri Doria, Keith McCloghrie, Uri Blumenthal, Donald Eastlake, Steve Kent. 1998 - 1999: Donald Eastlake(41/10) volunteers MD-5 Key: 135.9375/ 2.4.6.7.28.31.33./7.5/5273./27.125/ Steve Bellovin (IAB liaison) Bert Weijnen (IESG Liaison) Mike St. Johns (Ex. NOMCOM chair) Bob Hinden, R. A. Lichtensteiger, Bob Mahoney, Stephen R. Hanna, Lixia Zhang, Keith McCloghrie, David Meyer, Randall Gellens, Glen Zorn, Avri Doria. 1999 - 2000: Avri Doria (Nokia) Donald Easlake (Ex. NOMCOM chair) PS: - More details at http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf.txt Wanna switch from BIND 4.X to BIND 8.X? See also http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ - the "Standard Number 5 (RFC-791)" parody has been moved to http://ahbeng.vlsm.org/in-i-3.html tabe, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim VLSM-TJT -- http://www.vlsm.org/rms46/ - - A little bit of IP in my life - RFC791:Standard no 5 - Lou Bega -
IETF Trivia
Hello: My Rp. 100 (=$0.02) contribution to this coming Octoberfest would be a rough IETF Trivia list. Updates will be posted at http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf.txt Please feel free to send me corrections. For example, I guess that Debra J. Legare and Debra J. Bates from the IETF secretariat would be the same person. Also, it is not clear if it was ARPA or DARPA that set up the ICCB in 1979 or 1980. PS: A list of my favorite RFCs are available at http://gtm.vlsm.org/in-rfc.html regards, -- - Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim VLSM-TJT -- http://www.vlsm.org/rms46/ - - A little bit of IP in my life - RFC791:Standard no 5 - Lou Bega - 00112233445566 DUL-001: IETF Trivia revision 1999-Oct-08-2 ;;; All Rights Reversed, All Wrongs will be Reengineered ;;; Provided AS-IS! Liability? What is liability?;;; Compiler: Abdul Latip Sosroatmodjo Kertokusumo (dullatip) ;;; Omar Bakry School of Management ;;; Universe Centra Le Sahara (UCLS) ;;; Jabal Acacus (Silicon Valley), Ghat, Sahara. ;;; URL: http://dullatip.vlsm.org/ietf.txt;;; COMMENTS: please mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ;;; == IAB history (from the IMR) The IAB is descended from an Internet research advisory group set up about 1980 by DARPA, with the unlikely name of Internet Configuration Control Board, or ICCB. The ICCB chair was Dave Clark of the MIT Laboratory for Computer Science; he had played a leading role in the protocol research effort which developed the TCP/IP protocols. Around 1983, DARPA restructured the ICCB into a task-force-based Internet Activities Board, or IAB. Dave Clark continued as chair of the new IAB, and he held this post until Vint Cerf accepted this responsibility in July, 1989. memo: ARPA or DARPA ? 1979 or 1980 ? 1979 - 1983 ICCB: Internet Configuration Control Board Dave Clark - MIT 1983 - 1992 IAB: Internet Activities Board formed by DARPA Dave Clark - MIT (1983 - Jul 1989) Vint Cerf - CNRI (Jul 1989 - Jan 1992) 1992 - IAB: Internet Architecture Board Lyman Chapin (Jan 1992 - Apr 1993) Christian Huitema (Apr 1993 - Jul 1995) Brian Carpenter(Jul 1995 - ) memo: RARE, EDUCOM, and CNRI "chartered" the ISOC, however, ISOC was the old IAB's brainchild. Then the new IAB was chartered by the ISOC, but was somewhat blessed by FNC (NFS, DARPA, et. al.). See also ISOC. Liaisons to IESG Lyman Chapin 1992 - 1993 Christian Huitema 1993 - 1995 Yakov Rekhter 1993 - 1996 Brian Carpenter1995 - Robert Elz 1996 - 1998 Ned Freed 1998 - 1999 Liaison to the POC (gTLD-MoU) Patrik Falstrom1997 ++3 ? Rob Austein1997 ++1 ? Lars-Johan Liman 1998? Pindar Wong1998? Executive Director Bob Braden 1990 - 1993 Abel Weinrib 1995 - 1999 International Representative (CCIRN/RARE/ICB) Barry Leiner 1990 - 1993 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 Jay Allard Microsoft X X Harald T. Alvestrand Uninett, Maxware X Ran Atkinson X Rob Austein X Steve Bellovin X X X X Bob Braden ISI, ExecD 81 X X X X Hans-Werner Braun Merit, SDSC X X X X X Brian CarpenterCERN IBM X X X X X X Vint Cerf NRI, CNRI 79 X X X X Lyman Chapin DG, BBN87 X X X X Dave Clark MIT79 X X X Steve Crocker TISX X X Jon Crowcroft X X X X Steve Deering X X Robert ElzX X X Ned Freed Innosoft X X Elise Gerich Merit X X X X Phill Gross NRI, CNRI, ANS, IESG X X X X X X X Tony Hain
