Renumbering needs work

A draft on this topic has been updated: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-carpenter-renum-needs-work-01.txt Comments and discussion are invited on the OPS Area list, ops-a...@ietf.org Brian Carpenter Ran Atkinson Hannu Flinck P.S. Apologies if you receive multiple copies, but that

Re: [taugh.com-standards] Re: Review of draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-08

On Sun, 2009-01-04, Dave CROCKER wrote: >>From: ACME Chief Officers: >>Alice , >>Bob ; >> >> There must have been *some* concept of email that dictated that a message >> could be sent *to* a group but not *from* one! > I don't remember whether this idea came up during

Re: [taugh.com-standards] Re: Review of draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-08

Bill McQuillan wrote: Perhaps someone knows what the "Founders" (of email) conceptual models were for a "message" (memo?) For instance, although I obviously do not understand the "original intent" behind the "group of mailboxes" construct, I have long wondered why the following is not valid:

Re: Fwd: Security team successfully cracks SSL using 200 PS3's and MD5 flaw.

At Sun, 4 Jan 2009 07:51:01 -0500, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > I think that Hank raises a very good question. There has been > a very active discussion of this on NANOG, both re SSL, BGP and in > general. > > Here is the original link : > >

Fwd: Security team successfully cracks SSL using 200 PS3's and MD5 flaw.

I think that Hank raises a very good question. There has been a very active discussion of this on NANOG, both re SSL, BGP and in general. Here is the original link : Regards Marshall Begin forwarded messag