Many of the comments that were posted to this list have been incorporated.
Please comment on the updated document.
Russ
= = = = = = = = =
A new version of I-D, draft-housley-rfc2050bis-01.txt
has been successfully submitted by Geoff Huston and posted to the
IETF repository.
Filename:dr
On 07/04/2013, at 9:59 PM, Yoav Nir wrote:
> I mostly share the sentiment that this is just humor, so what's the harm.
>
> That said, I did at one point have to exercise my diplomatic skills when I
> got forwarded a customer (nameless here for evermore) question about whether
> support for RF
> From: Andrew Sullivan
> It's always April 1st somewhere on the Net?
Especially if you (or your packets, to be precise) can travel backwards in
time
Noel
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 01:32:08PM -0700, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> That this thread is still being pursued made me double-check that it is in
> fact not still April 1st.
It's always April 1st somewhere on the Net?
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
a...@anvilwalrusden.com
This is one of those DPEP (Diversity Problem Entry Point) arising from
globalization, April 1 HRC (Humor Recognition Culture) differences,
IETF "stalization" and the growth of I-D submissions. I suggest there
is a direct correlation among these factors with the end goal efficacy
of the submi
That this thread is still being pursued made me double-check that it is in
fact not still April 1st.
On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
> On 4/6/13 1:33 PM, Ulrich Herberg wrote:
> > Indeed. The wikipedia entry is somewhat misleading though:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apr
Subject: Re: [IETF] Comments for Humorous RFCs or uncategorised RFCs or
dated?April the first Date: Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 07:31:54PM + Quoting Yoav
Nir (y...@checkpoint.com):
> In this case I could tick that box without being a lying bastard. Just a
> sort-of deceitful one. It is possible to
On Apr 7, 2013, at 6:41 PM, Måns Nilsson wrote:
> Subject: RE: [IETF] Comments for Humorous RFCs or uncategorised RFCs or
> dated?April the first Date: Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 11:59:30AM + Quoting
> Yoav Nir (y...@checkpoint.com):
>> I mostly share the sentiment that this is just humor, so wh
On 4/7/2013 8:41 AM, Måns Nilsson wrote:
I do not want code or devices from people that don't "get" it in my
network. The April 1 series are useful documents.
Well said!
i believe that april 1 RFCs server several useful purposes. They remind
us to
not take ourselves too seriously. They remi
Subject: RE: [IETF] Comments for Humorous RFCs or uncategorised RFCs or
dated?April the first Date: Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 11:59:30AM + Quoting Yoav
Nir (y...@checkpoint.com):
> I mostly share the sentiment that this is just humor, so what's the harm.
>
> That said, I did at one point have to
>That said, I did at one point have to exercise my diplomatic skills when I got
>forwarded a customer (nameless
>here for evermore) question about whether support for RFC 3514 was on our
>roadmap.
Think of it as free market intelligence on your customer base.
Of course we've only had April 1 RF
Michael,
thank you for this thoughtful and extensive review.
We have turned nine of the items below into eight tickets, #287 to
#294 (see in-line references below), that will be processed along with
the other IETF last-call tickets and turned into
draft-ietf-core-coap-15 in the next few days.
Be
I mostly share the sentiment that this is just humor, so what's the harm.
That said, I did at one point have to exercise my diplomatic skills when I got
forwarded a customer (nameless here for evermore) question about whether
support for RFC 3514 was on our roadmap.
While the people on this lis
All April 1 RFCs should not be categorised historical but
Category: CLASSIFIED TOP SECRET EYES ONLY NEED TO KNOW SIPRNET COBRA VATICAN
FNORD KNITTING PATTERN
Distribution: Unlimited.
We should also start a December 25 series. With something on SOCKS.
Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/
14 matches
Mail list logo
