[ Please distribute this article as widely as possible, wherever appropriate. ]
The Free Protocols Foundation article
"Position Statement regarding the
RIM Mobile E-Mail Patent Assertion"
is provided as an attachment in Plain Text format.
The article states the position of the Free Prot
>>>>> On Fri, 02 Mar 2001 15:35:02 +0700, "Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>said:
Rahmat> Mohsen BANAN-Public wrote:
>> Did you follow the discussions that I initiated on
>> a similar set of topics on the [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Did you follow the discussions that I initiated on
a similar set of topics on the [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailing lists about two years ago?
In that thread I proposed something along the
lines that you are looking for. I am including my
last message on that thread below.
Bob Allisat <[EMAIL PROTECTE
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2001 13:25:09 -0500, "Hung Pham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2001 20:25:39 + (GMT), Lloyd Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>said:
Hung> Hello;
Hung> I'm interested in the "TCP for Transaction or T/TCP" protocol,
Hung> basically this protocol collapses
All of this and a great deal more is discussed in various old books,
such as:
- Internetwork Mobility - The CDPD Approach
Taylor, Waung and Banan
Prentice Hall
1996
ISBN: 0-13-209693-5
Hope this helps.
...Mohsen
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 23:04:39 -0400, Keith Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2000 20:52:53 -0400, Eric Brunner-Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>said:
>> And what WG? Internet Drafts were and are generated by Individuals w/o
>> benefit of an associated WG.
Eric> Precisely my point to Grenville.
Furthermore, the author may have nothing to do wi
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 12:04:10 +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
petri> Hi,
petri> We don't need yet-another mail delivery protocol by some new forum.
petri> We have already e.g. SIP which is capable of carrying MIME messages,
petri> including multipart
petri> and which supports capab
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 01:55:21 -0700 (PDT), "James P. Salsman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>said:
>> Those who want to build good things and move forward fast, can evaluate
>> the merits of LEAP and participate in its evolution and enhancement.
>>
>> The starting point URL is: http://www.l
To: The Internet Technical Community
> On Sat, 16 Sep 2000 17:44:56 -0700 (PDT), "James P. Salsman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>said:
James> (1) End-to-End Internet Services for Mobile Devices
James> Scope: Specifications and interoperability guidelines for
James> end-to-end mobile I
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 15:48:50 GMT, Bob Braden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Mohsen>
Mohsen> The Real component is that IETF/IESG/IAB is well on its way towards
Mohsen> becoming a cult violating all published procedures. IETF/IESG/IAB now
Mohsen> claims full ownership of the RFC Publicat
In 1997, D.J. Bernstein wrote a short note titled:
RFC submission: a case study
The full text of that note is available at
http://cr.yp.to/proto/rfced.html
D.J. Bernstein concluded his case study with the following
paragraph.
It's well known that the IETF is no longer the prima
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:04:34 +0200, Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m?=
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> After 7 months of delay, caused by the IESG, ESRO was published
>> as an RFC in Sept. 1997.
Patrik> There have already been enough discussions on the IETF list about
Patrik>
>>>>> On Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:23:41 +0200, Harald Tveit Alvestrand
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Harald> At 05:30 26.06.2000 +, Mohsen BANAN-Public wrote:
>> The current status, state and beginning date of that example
>> makes my point.
>>
Attached is a short description that introduces
LEAP: Lightweight & Efficient Application Protocols
as an alternative to WAP.
The full description is part of the LEAP Manifesto.
--
LEAP: One Alternative to WAP
Mohsen Banan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Existing SMTP/IMAP/TCP technology is not well suited for
mobile and wireless environments where bandwidth and
capacity are always limited and precious.
More efficient protocols are needed to address the new
reality of mobile and wireless networks. I am seeking
open protocols which are better s
>>>>> On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 08:38:38 +0200, Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m?=
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Patrik> At 00.31 +0000 00-06-24, Mohsen BANAN-Public wrote:
>> IETF/IESG/IAB folks keep saying TCP is good enough for everything.
Patrik> We do
> On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:10:16 -0600 (MDT), Vernon Schryver
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> ...
>> >Add to
>> >that even if there was enough bandwidth, small screen's on some of the
>> >today's devices can't meaningfully display a
> On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 11:05:43 -0400, "Brijesh Kumar"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Brijesh> PS: By the way, ReFLEX is perfectly fine for two way messaging
Brijesh> applications.
Mohsen> No.
Mohsen>
Mohsen> ReFLEX is not perfectly fine.
Mohsen>
Mohsen> It is not IP based.
B
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:02:39 +0100 (BST), Lloyd Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>said:
Lloyd> And from that anti-WAP polemic:
Mohsen> We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the
Mohsen> following persons in the preparation and review of
Mohsen> this document: Andrew Hammoude, Richa
I request that you review the attached document and
email us your comments to:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is what I consider a reasonably complete
version of the policies and procedures which
is likely to bring a lot of good in the area of
Internet protocol development.
If the Free Pro
> On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 10:17:25 -0700 (PDT), "James P. Salsman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>said:
James> The Free Protocols Foundation is correct in their position.
James> The amount of misrepresentation in the industry is becoming
James> absurd. Most of it is bait-and-switch, but beyond th
> On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 04:59:15 +0859 (), Masataka Ohta
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> The Internet end-to-end model will once again prevail, putting the
>> cellular service providers back into their proper place as providers
>> of packet pipes, nothing more. And life will be good again
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 10:30:31 -0400, "Brijesh Kumar"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Brijesh> It is an open secret that wireless industry is a closed cartel of
Brijesh> three super heavyweights (Motorola, Ericsson, and Nokia) and two heavy
Brijesh> weights (Lucent and Nortel). There is no
[ Please distribute this as widely as possible, wherever appropriate. ]
The WAP Trap
An Expose of the Wireless Application Protocol
Mohsen Banan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
for:
Free Protocols Foundation
http://www.FreeProtoco
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 11:56:57 -0700, "Dave Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Dave> not chat :)
Then, I assume what you are looking for is an
Efficient Mail Submission and Delivery Protocol (EMSD)
which is optimized for short messages.
Look at RFC-2524 and RFC-2188.
EMSD is roughl
25 matches
Mail list logo
