first of all I don't think this belongs in the IETF forum.
>
> Vint said "has increased the priority of root server security
> evaluation" This is
> an interesting comment. Again Vint please be concrete. What
> precisely have they done? Where is their report? Have they ever
> actually
Steve,
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Steve Hotz wrote:
>
> H?
> At the risk of feeding a diversionary thread, it does
> seem appropriate to address the question of the number
> of Internet users who can "see" New.net's domain names.
[ many lines of self gratification trimmed ]
I don't believe the
[ cc list trimmed ]
On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> Okay, so when every foo.com. applies to become a foo., how will you control
> the growth? What is to keep the root from becoming a flat namespace within
> a few weeks? It won't take long for the masses realize that an SLD is not
dns naming debates don't belong on the IETF list. there is a
sandbox created just for naming debates, see [EMAIL PROTECTED]
those interested in continuing these discussions should pick them up some
place else.
thanks,
-rick
> I agree with the notion that all folks in positions of perceived
> power (e.g. IAB, IESG, WG Chairs, IRTF Chair) should be required to
> disclose publicly all of their relationships (e.g. employment,
> presence on other Internet-related positions such as board of a
> registry, technical a
Harald,
I'd never seen any finances for the ietf, but are these from 2002 or did
it just take that long to pull 2001 expenses together?
-rick
On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> I have put two web pages up at the following URL:
>
> http://www.ietf.org/u/chair/
>
> One details
FYI
-rick
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 14:15:30 -0500
Subject: FW: US Grants ICANN Extension of Global Domain Powers
US Grants ICANN Extension of Global Domain Powers
By Kevin Murphy
ICANN, which manages policy aspects of the internet's domain name system, is
Could we see these cutoff dates on the main meeting page, since they
change and the location of this document isn't well know.
thanks,
-rick
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Internet-Drafts Administrator wrote:
>
> NOTE: There are two (2) Internet-Draft Cutoff dates
>
> February 24th: Cutoff for Initia
ok, got it. I had looked for the dates last week and couldn't find them.
consider me now, clued.
-rick
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, John C Klensin wrote:
>
>
> --On Friday, 14 February, 2003 09:24 -0800 Rick Wesson
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Could we se
Harald,
> The short and sweet of it is: Unless we change something, our current
> funding methods won't pay for our current work.
> At the presentation, I'll ask the floor what they think about various ideas
> for improving the situation.
At one point some of us tried to use the .org redelegati
PIR board but otherwise there is no
> financial connection.
>
> Vint
>
> At 12:08 PM 3/15/2003 -0800, Rick Wesson wrote:
>
>
> >Harald,
> >
> >> The short and sweet of it is: Unless we change something, our current
> >> funding methods won't pay f
dean a small note before i add you to my procmailrc
>
> On Wed, 28 May 2003, Eric A. Hall wrote:
>
> > You still don't seem to understand the nature of proof, arguing instead
> > that the existence of alternatives somehow disproves a matter of fact.
> > Again, whether or not you think that the pr
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Christian Huitema wrote:
[snip]
> Obviously, cutting of the A root would have some pretty drastic
> consequences. On the other hand, there are many computers that have no
> business contacting directly the root servers. For example, in many
> enterprises and campuses, compute
> An excellent question! But that is a discussion that belongs with
> ICANN, not the IETF.
>
> Jim
Jim,
that would be true if the ICANN were functioning and this event is just
proof that the ICANN does not function.
the mission of ICANN (my paraphrase) is "Technical Administration of
Internet
Dean,
ok, i asked nicely and privately several times.
PLEASE! take this thread some place else.
-rick
On Tue, 11 May 2004, Dean Anderson wrote:
> On Mon, 10 May 2004, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>
> > So? Rob's not refusing to accept *any* email *at all* from you as a person
> > (just from a range of
> This is the sort of thing ISOC should speak out on.
doh! ISOC can't as they are the major benefactor from the .org divestature
from verisign.
sorry, try again.
-rick
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo
does anyone know of any server/service that uses ACAP as in rfc2244, i've
seen the cmu pages about it -- just wondering if anyone here knows of any
source available servers, and if or why the protocol never got widely
adopted.
thanks,
-rick
Florian,
there is no guarantee the uniqueness of WHOIS handles. there is no name
space for whois, nor an entity to register such.
pick any prefix you wish.
-rick
On Sat, 12 Oct 2002, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Is there some method to guarantee the uniqueness of WHOIS handles?
> Can I register af
18 matches
Mail list logo
