John C Klensin wrote:
Still, the draft may assure new usages compatible with each
other.
That is the hope.
The problem is that an existing and an new usages may not be
compatible.
If we need subtypes because 16bit RRTYPE space is not enough
(I don't think so), the issue should be
On 9/4/13, IAB Chair iab-ch...@ietf.org wrote:
As requested by the community, the IAB has decided to open a mailing list
to
discuss topics regarding the intersection of Internet governance and IETF
technical work. In particular, this list will focus on issues relating to
Internet governance
On 9/5/13 6:01 AM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
On 9/4/13, IAB Chair iab-ch...@ietf.org wrote:
As requested by the community, the IAB has decided to open a mailing list
to
discuss topics regarding the intersection of Internet governance and IETF
technical work. In particular, this list will
- Original Message -
From: t.p. daedu...@btconnect.com
To: adr...@olddog.co.uk; 'Michelle Cotton'
michelle.cot...@icann.org; 'ietf' ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 4:35 PM
Original Message -
From: Adrian Farrel adr...@olddog.co.uk
To: 'Michelle Cotton'
On 9/5/13 2:45 PM, Scott O Bradner wrote:
looks good to me except that maybe using the IETF Announce list rather than
IESG minutes as the publication of record
The only reason I went with the IESG minutes is because they do state
the pending actions too, as well as the completed ones,
Thanks Andrew, I am happy to see a survey draft, I never seen one
before in IETF, however, if there was a survey done before in IETF, it
will be interesting to mention that if you think necessary related.
On 9/5/13, Andrew G. Malis agma...@gmail.com wrote:
Abdussalam,
Many thanks for your
I also agree that the minutes are the most complete/official record we have.
Jari
On Sep 6, 2013, at 1:40 AM, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com
wrote:
I tend to agree with Pete - the minutes are more like an official
record, as well. BTW, the IESG Charter (RFC 3710) says:
The
I tend to agree with Pete - the minutes are more like an official
record, as well. BTW, the IESG Charter (RFC 3710) says:
The IESG publishes a record of decisions from its meetings on the
Internet,...
In any case, apart from this detail, I think the draft is good to go.
Brian
On 06/09/2013
On 9/1/13, Eduardo A. Suárez esua...@fcaglp.fcaglp.unlp.edu.ar wrote:
What is unbearable to me is that in more than one discussion in a
mailing list someone's opinion is censored because misspell their
ideas or opinions.
I don't think that is unbearable, usually in communications between IP
Having seen no further comments, Jari has asked me to post -01 with the
changes. Done.
pr
--
Pete Resnickhttp://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478
Abdussalam,
Many thanks for your review and comments on the draft. I have some answers
inline.
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Abdussalam Baryun
abdussalambar...@gmail.com wrote:
The Reviewer: Abdussalam Baryun
Date: 05.09.2013
I-D name: draft-ietf-pwe3-vccv-impl-survey-results
Received
looks good to me except that maybe using the IETF Announce list rather than
IESG minutes as the publication of record
Scott
On Sep 5, 2013, at 1:10 PM, Pete Resnick presn...@qti.qualcomm.com wrote:
Having seen no further comments, Jari has asked me to post -01 with the
changes. Done.
pr
Thanks Peter.
I fixed all the nits:
https://github.com/martinthomson/drafts/commit/0e7cc6089e96f6b4b2a2cff0d094733b313b8e39
On 31 July 2013 13:50, Peter Yee pe...@akayla.com wrote:
Page 9, section 4.2, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: I'll admit my ignorance
of the finer points of the DNS and
This is bigger than the perpass list.
I suggested that the surveillance/broken crypto challenge represents damage to
the Internet. I'm not the only one thinking that way.
I'd like to share the challenge raised by Bruce Schneier in:
At 14:45 05-09-2013, Scott O Bradner wrote:
looks good to me except that maybe using the IETF Announce list rather than
IESG minutes as the publication of record
What draft-resnick-retire-std1-01 says is that the publication of
record has been the IESG minutes. I read what Scott Bradner
so, it might be a good idea to hold a pgp signing party in van. but
there are interesting issues in doing so. we have done lots of parties
so have the social protocols and n00b cheat sheets. but that is the
trivial tip of the iceberg.
o is pgp compromised? just because it is not listed in
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013, Dean Willis wrote:
This is bigger than the perpass list.
I suggested that the surveillance/broken crypto challenge represents damage to the
Internet. I'm not the only one thinking that way.
an additional call to action can be found here:
I'm sorry, I don't detect the emergency.
I'm not saying there's no issue or no work to do, but what's new about
any of this?
Was PRISM a surprise to anyone who knew that the Five Eyes sigint
organisations have been cooperating since about 1942 and using
intercontinental data links since 1944)?
--On Thursday, September 05, 2013 15:20 -0700 Pete Resnick
presn...@qti.qualcomm.com wrote:
IESG minutes as the publication of record
The only reason I went with the IESG minutes is because they
do state the pending actions too, as well as the completed
ones, which the IETF Announce
On Sep 5, 2013 5:17 PM, Dean Willis dean.wil...@softarmor.com wrote:
This is bigger than the perpass list.
I suggested that the surveillance/broken crypto challenge represents
damage to the Internet. I'm not the only one thinking that way.
I'd like to share the challenge raised by Bruce
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote:
so, it might be a good idea to hold a pgp signing party in van. but
there are interesting issues in doing so. we have done lots of parties
so have the social protocols and n00b cheat sheets. but that is the
trivial tip of the
On 9/5/2013 5:45 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
is pgp compromised?
PGP is a packaging method. Absent grossly incompetent packaging -- and
I've never heard claims that PGP or S/MIME were guilty of that -- my
sense is that the interesting security mechanisms are the underlying
algorithms.
Is there
On Sep 5, 2013, at 8:46 PM, Lucy Lynch lly...@civil-tongue.net wrote:
I'd like to share the challenge raised by Bruce Schneier in:
I thought it was a great call to action. Is Bruce coming to Vancouver?
On Sep 5, 2013, at 9:36 PM, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com
wrote:
I'm sorry, I don't detect the emergency.
I think we all knew NSA was collecting the data. Why didn't we do something
about it sooner? Wasn't it an emergency when the PATRIOT act was passed? We
certainly
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm sorry, I don't detect the emergency.
I'm not saying there's no issue or no work to do, but what's new about
any of this?
Was PRISM a surprise to anyone who knew that the Five Eyes sigint
organisations
From: Dean Willis dean.wil...@softarmor.com
The [IETF] .. needs dedicate its next meeting to this task. This is
an emergency, and demands an emergency response.
The thing is that I'm not sure how much of this is the NSA 'breaking'
protocols/algorithms, and how much is finding ways
On 06/09/2013 15:08, Ted Lemon wrote:
On Sep 5, 2013, at 9:36 PM, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com
wrote:
I'm sorry, I don't detect the emergency.
I think we all knew NSA was collecting the data. Why didn't we do something
about it sooner? Wasn't it an emergency when the
On 9/5/2013 8:08 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
they convinced us we'd won
We've done quite a sales job on ourselves, also.
Remember the IAB tech plenary that declared protocols dead, because the
client is downloaded from the server? Think about that, in the light of
recent revelations about
On 9/5/13 7:19 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
I'm not talking about what implementors and operators and users
should be doing; still less about what legislators should or
shouldn't be doing. I care about all those things, but the question
here is what standards or informational outputs from the
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker hal...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm sorry, I don't detect the emergency.
I'm not saying there's no issue or no work to do, but what's new about
any of this?
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 03:28:28PM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
OK, that's actionable in the IETF, so can we see the I-D before
the cutoff?
Why is that discussion of this nailed to the cycle of IETF meetings?
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
a...@anvilwalrusden.com
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Vinayak Hegde vinay...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker hal...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm sorry, I don't detect the emergency.
I'm not
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker hal...@gmail.com
S/MIME is almost what we need to secure email.
If by secure email you mean 'render email impervious to being looked at
while on the wire', perhaps. If, however, you mean 'render it secure from
ever being looked at by anyone else', no way.
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 11:28 PM, Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/09/2013 15:11, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
...
S/MIME is almost what we need to secure email. What is missing is an
effective key discovery scheme. We could add that and add Ben Laurie's
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 11:32 PM, Andrew Sullivan a...@anvilwalrusden.comwrote:
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 03:28:28PM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
OK, that's actionable in the IETF, so can we see the I-D before
the cutoff?
Why is that discussion of this nailed to the cycle of IETF
On 6 sep 2013, at 05:39, j...@mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) wrote:
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker hal...@gmail.com
S/MIME is almost what we need to secure email.
If by secure email you mean 'render email impervious to being looked at
while on the wire', perhaps. If, however, you mean
Total of 149 messages in the last 7 days.
script run at: Fri Sep 6 00:53:02 EDT 2013
Messages | Bytes| Who
+--++--+
7.38% | 11 | 6.82% |81747 | sm+i...@elandsys.com
5.37% |8 | 4.69% |56229 |
This assumes, of course, that current crypto technology
(ciphers, anyway) is sufficient, which Schneier seems to
think is the case.
side discussion wonders whether bruce may be a bit on the
pollyanna side on this aspect.
randy
On 9/5/13 8:59 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
side discussion wonders whether bruce may be a bit on the
pollyanna side on this aspect.
That's a really interesting question, and I have no idea what
the answer is. One reason it's interesting is that until
this all broke there was a reasonable assumption
The IESG has received a request from the Common Control and Measurement
Plane WG (ccamp) to consider the following document:
- 'Evaluation of existing GMPLS encoding against G.709v3 Optical
Transport Networks (OTN)'
draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-11.txt as Informational RFC
The IESG
A new IETF non-working group email list has been created.
List address: c...@ietf.org
Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cnit/current/maillist.html
To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cnit
Purpose: This list is for discussions relating to providing source calling name
A new IETF non-working group email list has been created.
List address: vnfp...@ietf.org
Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vnfpool/current/maillist.html
To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vnfpool
Purpose: Virtualization technology, from server virtualization,
42 matches
Mail list logo
