On Mar 20, 2008, at 3:30 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
>
>
> --On Friday, 21 March, 2008 09:03 +1100 Mark Andrews
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I think Doug is saying don't let domains with just
>> records be treated as valid RHS of email. Today we
>> have to add records to d
LB:
The first step is to appeal to Chris Newman. If you do not find his
response satisfactory, then you raise the matter with me as IETF
Chair. If you do not find my response satisfactory, then you raise
the matter with the IESG. If you do not find the IESG response
satisfactory, then you r
Hi Ben,
I believe I've addressed your editorial comments and will send a
draft copy to yourself and the other authors (not ietf.org). The
updated version will also include Nischal Seth's comment regarding
the wording inadvertently precluding OSPF point-to-point over LAN
interfaces.
With re
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 10:22:01AM +0100,
LB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
a message of 96 lines which said:
> what I take for a censure for offence of opinion or nationality. I
> think like somebody else, I use the technical vocabulary appropriate
> for my thought. I think in the same mother tongu
> "LB" == LB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LB> Dear Russ, I am not sure what should be the "next step" and I
LB> wish that all is clear and transparent in the management of
LB> what I take for a censure for offence of opinion or
LB> nationality. I think like somebody else, I use
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer for
this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html). Please resolve
these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.
Thanks,
Spencer
Document:
Dear Russ,
I am not sure what should be the "next step" and I wish that all is
clear and transparent in the management of what I take for a censure
for offence of opinion or nationality. I think like somebody else, I
use the technical vocabulary appropriate for my thought. I think in
the same mothe
