mailing list__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
begin to experience
difficulty when you try to send mail to the IETF -- either to the
Secretariat or to a mailing list -- we have created a form that will enable
you to report your problem (the form bypasses the spam filters). Once we
know that you are experiencing difficulty, we can create an
Hi.
I'd like not to receive ietf mail any more in this e-mail address.
please don't send mail to this e-mail([EMAIL PROTECTED])
thank you.
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Hello,
I was wondering if someone (IAB, IESG, wg chairs, whomever) could
strongly encourage the folks that maintain archives to provide them
as a series (volumes), as opposed to a single clump/file. Some
archivists do provide a more structured breakdown based on month/year.
However, others ha
unsubscribe
The mailing list for discussion of getting difficult
protocols across firewalls and NATs is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], or those so inclined
can use the web interface at http://www.egroups.com.
Thanks,
Melinda
e risks in today's internet?
>
>Talking about a WG seems premature. The first step would be to start a
>discussion list and maybe schedule a BOF. If those steps prove fruitful
>a WG would be a possibility.
>
>I can set up a mailing list if you like.
Loath as I am to subscribe to y
I realize that the DRIS BOF was put together somewhat quickly, but
the mailing list situation is a little frustrating.
1) there's no mailing list archive at the URL given on the agenda
2) there are no subscription directions on the agenda
3) mail sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] bounces
4) mail se
Please remove from this mailing list. I sent several unsubscribe messages but in
vain.
Thanks
Ahmed Darwish
Strategic Technology Planning,
SITA EQUANT S.C.
Phone: 770-303-3811
Fax: 770-612-4820
CVS : 7-224-3811
Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Are there any recent problems being encountered with the discussion list? I have
noticed a dramatic drop in activity in recent days almost Nasdaq like.
-Don
Are there any recent problems being encountered with the discussion list? I have
noticed a dramatic drop in activity in recent days almost Nasdaq like.
-Don
The PWOT mailing list has been created for discussion
of Pseudo Wires Over Transport. PWOT is a descendant
of CEOT (Circulation Emulation Over Transport), and is
a to-be working group.
The IESG is working with the chairs to finalize the
charter now and a BOF slot has been secured for the
We're running a number of IETF mailing lists on our server here at
Columbia. Some of the lists have gotten a bit larger and more popular
than we anticipated; sendmail is groaning. Any suggestions for alternate
delivery software (for Solaris and/or Linux)? (Since this is somewhat
off-topic, please
mate posts as there is no reason to
post to the ietf list unless you are subscribed to it, but will stop the bulk
of the spammers.
I am suffering the same problem with the Linux Beer Hike mailing list and am
about to make the same change, it was fine for the last couple of years up to
about 2 mon
com/>
___
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
06GHz/80GB/1GB/2TB $59.99/mo.
Dedicated servers, VPS, and hosting from $2.50/mo.
_______
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Hi,
in response to the first TSVAREA meeting in Montreal, we have set up
a corresponding area-wide mailing list.
The purpose of the TSVAREA meeting (and the associated mailing list)
is to inform about and discuss important issues, developments and
work within the transport area. The area
Several IETFs ago, a mailing list was set up for a VPN BoF. Some of us
are on that list, but unfortunately there appears to be nobody
responsible for managing that list, and the majordomo robot is busted.
The only thing to come through this list in months is spam. This email
is to point out two
Dear all:
A mailing list has been formed to discuss a
Open Base Station Protocol (OBAST). This
mailing list is a pre-cursor to a possible upcoming
BOF. If you are interested in this discussion
please join the list by subscribing as follows:
Send the following command in email to
The IETF_Censored mailing list
At times, the IETF list is subject to debates that have little to do
with the purposes for which the IETF list was created. Some people
would appreciate a "quieter" forum for the relevant debates that take
place, but
The IETF_Censored mailing list
At times, the IETF list is subject to debates that have little to do
with the purposes for which the IETF list was created. Some people
would appreciate a "quieter" forum for th
The IETF_Censored mailing list
At times, the IETF list is subject to debates that have little to do
with the purposes for which the IETF list was created. Some people
would appreciate a "quieter" forum for th
The IETF_Censored mailing list
At times, the IETF list is subject to debates that have little to do
with the purposes for which the IETF list was created. Some people
would appreciate a "quieter" forum for th
Hi All,
We have established a mailing list for the discussion of the
IETF's internal education efforts, which were discussed at
the Education (edu) BOF in Vienna. A summary of the BOF
appears below, and full minutes will be sent to the edu-discuss
mailing list.
People who are interest
I'm resending this since it looks like it did not get posted the last time
----
a mailing list to followup on teh newtrk BOF has been created
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
subscribe
mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"subscribe newtrk" in body
web user interface
http://darkwing.uore
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 1:01 PM
Subject: dris mailing list
> I realize that the DRIS BOF was put together somewhat quickly, but
> the mailing list situation is a little frustrating.
>
> 1) there's no mailing list archive at the URL given on the agenda
> 2) there are no subsc
What's dris? Not on the IETF agenda.
--aaron
On Mar 1, 2004, at 2:01 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
I realize that the DRIS BOF was put together somewhat quickly, but
the mailing list situation is a little frustrating.
1) there's no mailing list archive at the URL given on the agenda
2) th
Mar 1, 2004, at 2:01 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
I realize that the DRIS BOF was put together somewhat quickly, but
the mailing list situation is a little frustrating.
1) there's no mailing list archive at the URL given on the agenda
2) there are no subscription directions on the agenda
3) mail sent
mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe: To join the DRIS discussion list, send a request to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and enter the word subscribe in the Subject line of the
message and in the message body.
Relatted archive will be organized in
http://202.114.9.3/dl-lib/English/main.htm.
Wang
This is in relation to the IIRI BoF.
-andy
On Mar 1, 2004, at 9:14 PM, Aaron Falk wrote:
What's dris? Not on the IETF agenda.
--aaron
On Mar 1, 2004, at 2:01 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
I realize that the DRIS BOF was put together somewhat quickly, but
the mailing list situation is a l
think it
is bad practice to have that default to 'on' for new subscribers given that
mailing lists are often piped into public archives.
--
Cyrus Daboo
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
I'm writing to announce the opening of the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing
list as the next step towards the formation of an IETF Working Group
that would develop open standards for scalable, multi(air)-protocol
Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) reader control and data
acquisition opera
Hello,
I submitted a draft which discusses about a mailing list protocol
[1]. It is a code of courtesy that the reader may wish to extend to
others to facilitate the exchange of opinions and ideas, and to
facilitate mailing list discussions. Sally Hambridge deserves full
credit for most of
After discussions with Scott Bradner, I have set up a mailing list at
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/siglite
to discuss interest in possibly having a BOF on light-weight approaches
to network-layer signaling for QoS, network state setup, pricing
information and related topics
At 04:08 PM 2/21/01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Are there any recent problems being encountered with the discussion list?
>I have noticed a dramatic drop in activity in recent days
>almost Nasdaq like.
The Internet Draft submission deadlines are approaching. People are busy
doing
> The PWOT mailing list has been created for discussion
> of Pseudo Wires Over Transport. PWOT is a descendant
> of CEOT (Circulation Emulation Over Transport), and is
> a to-be working group.
could you elaborate a bit? maybe a pointer to a web page with general info?
I've b
Danny, Lloyd,
Having just been through this with midcom, may I suggest to Danny
and Luca that [EMAIL PROTECTED] opt out of the member-only posting
option on the IETF's mailman?
Allison (one of the co-ADs for both midcom and the proposed pwot).
> Please clarify exactly what you mean by 'Member posting only' for an
> IETF WG list. (You may wish to read recent discussion on poisson
> over the last month first, and consider the implications.)
Anti-spam measures are in place (i.e., non-member posts are moderated).
I believe this should a
my impression is that postfix can run up to an order of magnitude greater
message loads than regular sendmail.
d/
At 07:17 AM 3/16/2001, Henning G. Schulzrinne wrote:
>We're running a number of IETF mailing lists on our server here at
>Columbia. Some of the lists have gotten a bit larger and mo
"Henning G. Schulzrinne" wrote:
> We're running a number of IETF mailing lists on our server here at
> Columbia. Some of the lists have gotten a bit larger and more popular
> than we anticipated; sendmail is groaning. Any suggestions for alternate
> delivery software (for Solaris and/or Linux)?
The IETF_Censored mailing list
At times, the IETF list is subject to debates that have little to do
with the purposes for which the IETF list was created. Some people
would appreciate a "quieter" forum for th
Andy Fletcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There appears to be a lot of spam on this list at the moment. Most of it
> appears to be coming from addresses which probably are not subscribed to the
> list.
>
> If the list posting policy is 'open' can it be changed to 'subscribed
> addresses' on
> This won't stop legitimate posts as there is no reason to
> post to the ietf list unless you are subscribed to it
where did you get that idea?
Lloyd Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In the IETF, there's often reason to cross-post to WG lists that you
> aren't subscribed to, when discussion veers that way. The IESG
> does that a lot, and 'subscriber only' policies will hold up IESG
> business as a result.
When you are the maintainer o
Perry,
a substantial subset of the readers of the ietf list subscribe to the
list via some other means - whether ietf-censored or some other sub-list
or a web archive. so a list of subscribers to the main ietf list doesn't
make a very good filter.
personally, I like the ietf-censored filterin
> From: Keith Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> a substantial subset of the readers of the ietf list subscribe to the
> list via some other means - whether ietf-censored or some other sub-list
> or a web archive. so a list of subscribers to the main ietf list doesn't
> make a very good filter.
More
At 4:54 PM -0400 5/20/01, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>When you are the maintainer of a list
That assumes that someone is the maintainer of the IETF mailing list.
At this moment, that is not the case. You are asking that an
additional task be put on one of the IETF Secretariat folks. That&#
Hi -
> Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 22:18:52 +0100 (BST)
> From: Lloyd Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Lloyd Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Perry E. Metzger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> cc: Andy Fletcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sub
> "Lloyd" == Lloyd Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lloyd> That assumption crops up a lot.
Lloyd> In the IETF, there's often reason to cross-post to WG lists that you
Lloyd> aren't subscribed to, when discussion veers that way. The IESG
Lloyd> does that a lot, and 'subscriber
Michael Richardson wrote:
> This "list of lists", alas, would become a spammer/head-hunter target if
> made too easily accessible, but we already have that problem.
In addition, it would mean that anybody subscribed to one IETF list could spam all
of them, which would weaken the protection. T
--- John Stracke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> > This "list of lists", alas, would become a spammer/head-hunter
> target if
> > made too easily accessible, but we already have that problem.
>
> In addition, it would mean that anybody subscribed to one IETF list
>
weeks before an
IETF meeting, of course. Why isn't RUN standing-room-only?
Spencer
- Original Message -
From: "Kevin Farley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 3:48 PM
Subject: Re: Mailing list policy
>
> ---
Kevin Farley wrote:
> --- John Stracke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Today, if you want to
> > spam all of
> > them, you have to subscribe to all of them, which is impractical.
(I spoke sloppily, by the way. For "today", read "with separate filters
on every list".)
> Impractical, but through
PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 9:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Mailing list policy
Kevin Farley wrote:
> ---
--- John Stracke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kevin Farley wrote:
>
> > --- John Stracke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Today, if you want to
> > > spam all of
> > > them, you have to subscribe to all of them, which is impractical.
>
> (I spoke sloppily, by the way. For "today", read "with s
tuff for? We got 300 character/second
teletype. Who's ever going to need more than that?..." - Sparky, the
30 year two-wire man.
-Original Message-
From: Willis, Scott L [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 10:27 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Mailing list
Hello:
Well, it was yet another burst of suggestions.
But, what was the problem? And, whose problem?
Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:
>> When you are the maintainer of a list
> That assumes that someone is the maintainer of the IETF mailing list.
> At this moment, that is not the case. Yo
Hello all,
Could anyone tell me some mailing lists for BGP? I
tried to subscribe to the one @merit.edu but haven't
received any reponse from the server. Thanks.
Dong
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo
Hi folks:
The IP Packet Trace (IPPT) mailing list is now working (actually, has been
up for over a month but just started to see traffic this week). Almost
everyone who attend the IPPT BOF in Salt Lake is on the list -- if you're
not on the list it is because I couldn't puzzle out
I agree that we should move this to a new list: ietf-78 which I hereby
ask Ray to create.
Is there some reason we need a new list for every meeting?
Why not have a single, stable, continuing mailing list for these postings.
ietf-meeting, for example.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg
This is ridiculous and could get out of hand very quickly. I shudder to
think what would happen if even 5% of the subscribers to a mailing list
sent this kind of dreck in response to every email posted to the list --
it would effectively become infeasible to participate in mailing lists
at all
> 1. would the person or persons at Bay Networks/Nortel who are
> responsible for this mailing list system PLEASE do something about it?
> Email to Postmaster apparently is directed to /dev/null.
I will forward to the person I know who might know.
> 2. IETF working group mailing l
Thomas Narten wrote:
> > 2. IETF working group mailing lists NEED to be run on an IETF system.
>
> Since no VPN WG was ever formed, this mailing list would not have been
> eligible to be an official IETF list.
That would be one possible policy. Another would be, "OK, if w
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Stracke writes:
> Thomas Narten wrote:
>
> > > 2. IETF working group mailing lists NEED to be run on an IETF system.
> >
> > Since no VPN WG was ever formed, this mailing list would not have been
> > eligible to be an
On Mon, Oct 18, 1999 at 04:12:26PM -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Stracke writes:
> > Thomas Narten wrote:
> >
> > > > 2. IETF working group mailing lists NEED to be run on an IETF system.
> > >
> > >
ufficient consensus because only few people discussed the
> topic on a "secret" mailing list?
> Anyway. Opening or creating the mailinglist could help us to identify
> the subject of the of a possible working group.
>
> /alex pilger
>
>
It was an open mailing list. T
I apologize if this information is available elsewhere, but I was wondering
if the Majordomo at ietf.org is a resource available for hosting mailing
lists
for discussions which aspire to be an IETF working group?
Such a discussion has been ongoing on the SOAP mailing list in the wake of
the
the bullet and make certain network elements
visible to applications by creating explicit external interfaces.
To that end, we've requested a BOF session ("foglamps") for
the upcoming meeting in Adelaide, and have created a foglamps
mailing list on egroups.com (sorry). To subscr
transcribing here >
< Phils presentation will be available on-line soon... please join
the obast-list if any of the above interests you>
Thank you
R
Randall Stewart wrote:
>
> Dear all:
>
> A mailing list has been formed to discuss a
> Open Base Station Protoc
Could you delete my Email from this mailing list:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thank you.
Best regards.
How timely...
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 03:03:01AM +0200, Super-User wrote:
>
> The IETF_Censored mailing list
>
>At times, the IETF list is subject to debates that have little to do
>with the purposes for whic
--Dean
On Sun, 1 Jun 2003, Tim Chown wrote:
> How timely...
>
> On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 03:03:01AM +0200, Super-User wrote:
> >
> > The IETF_Censored mailing list
> >
> >At times, the IETF list is subject to debates that have lit
On Sun, 1 Jun 2003, Dean Anderson wrote:
> It should also be noted that those receiving thie limited IETF
> information, like those receiving censored news, have very little to
> contribute since they don't know the whole story.
H, if the ietf censored list is so bad for my education, how
--- David Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> H, if the ietf censored list is so bad for my education,
> how is it
> that I see your post? Since the spam topic started a week or
> so ago, I
> have not observed a single response post for which I didn't
> receive the
> original.
Ditto, no mat
to 'on' for new subscribers given that
> mailing lists are often piped into public archives.
>
> --
> Cyrus Daboo
>
> _______
> Ietf mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>
Barvick<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Date : Nov 16, 2004 02:19Title : RFID mailing list announcement
I'm writing to announce the opening of the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing
list as the next step towards the formation of an IETF Working Group
that would develop open standards for scalable, multi(air)-pro
d the access and control requirements for RFID networks will be
different. These will be good topics to discuss on the mailing list now
that it is up.
Scott
On Mon, 2004-11-15 at 12:39, Daniel Park wrote:
> In 61st IETF meeting, a new BOF as IPv6 over 802.15.4 (ZigBee) was
>
> held and
eing approved?
-Ekr
_______
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Hi. I've updated the mailing list experiment draft based on feedback
and version 01 is available.
A change log is included below.
It is my plan to incorperate any responses to feedback I get here and
then ask the IESG to publish the draft as an experimental RFC. I
expect to send i
This is an announcement for the creation of the NETTEST mail list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
General information about the mailing list is at:
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nettest
Craig Brown ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is the administrator of the list.
The purpose of the list is to open the
There have been some offline discussions as to how we can improve the
situation and encourage the participation of women in the IETF. One of
the things was a mailing list. There actually already is one hosted on
ietf.org (setup by Mirjam and Margaret) -syst...@ietf.org:
https://www.ietf.org
A group of folks have had discussions over the years about finding ways to
encourage and support the participation of women in the IETF. For those who are
interested, this is a reminder that a mailing list exists for IETF women:
syst...@ietf.org. Sign-up is at <https://www.ietf.org/mail
> From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> S Moonesamy
>
> (b) replies to messages which use an odd quoting style [2].
>
> 2. http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/
[WEG] The referenced program doesn't work for anything 2007 or later (aka
version
On 4 December 2012 14:19, George, Wes wrote:
>> 2. http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/
>
> [WEG] The referenced program doesn't work for anything 2007 or later (aka
> versions still supported by MS), making it of limited use.
I'm happy to share my (crappy) VB macro for doing t
Those are all endpoint implementation problems and thus not subject to IETF
standardization :-)
What are "those"?
Without the context it is impossible to guess, at least for me.
.as
On 04/12/2012 23:34, Scott Brim wrote:
> Those are all endpoint implementation problems and thus not subject to
> IETF standardization :-)
>
Hi Arturo,
At 06:16 05-12-2012, Arturo Servin wrote:
What are "those"?
Without the context it is impossible to guess, at least for me.
According to
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg76273.html
the message posted by Scott Brim (
http://www.ietf.org/mail-arc
On Tue Dec 4 22:19:14 2012, George, Wes wrote:
Is there an IETF standard format for handling inline quote replies?
Is it just not implemented in certain mail clients?
RFC 3676? (As used here).
It is admittedly primarily useful in simple replies rather than
quoting (and therefore attributi
On Thu 06/Dec/2012 13:36:07 +0100 Dave Cridland wrote:
>
> In general, there are a number of technical standards and protocols
> which are useful, or essential, for IETF participation; documenting
> these in a single location would seem beneficial.
Don't forget the confidentiality notices conundr
>Is there an IETF standard format for handling inline quote replies?
It's defined in the same RFC that specifies the setting of the
Reply-To: header in mailing lists.
laimers in messages [4].
I avoided a discussion of standards or to dictate etiquette in
draft-moonesamy-mail-list-protocol. Section 2 list points which may
see obvious to a lot of people on this mailing list. The text at
http://www.ietf.org/newcomers.html doesn't provide a lot of
in
On 12/9/12 10:43 AM, S Moonesamy wrote:
> I would like to ask you to pick the three points from Section 2 (
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moonesamy-mail-list-protocol-00 ) which
> you consider as helpful to facilitate mailing list discussion and send
> them to me off-list.
On 09/12/2012 20:40, Melinda Shore wrote:
> process documents. I hope that where your efforts end up is a wiki
> page or some such, which I think would be helpful, rather than an RFC,
> which I think would not.
Pretty much everything in the draft is covered by many third party wikis
and faqs alre
you consider as helpful to facilitate mailing
>> list discussion and send them to me off-list. I'll post a
>> summary to this mailing list after a week.
>
> I'm increasingly not a fan of process documents. It may be
> the case that we need a process document addressing
Melinda Shore wrote:
On 12/9/12 10:43 AM, S Moonesamy wrote:
I would like to ask you to pick the three points from Section 2 (
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moonesamy-mail-list-protocol-00 ) which
you consider as helpful to facilitate mailing list discussion and send
them to me off-list
> I'm increasingly not a fan of process documents.
the rise of a bureaucratic class is a dangerous sign of ossification.
i just failed gobbling for an image of the net police ticket dr postel
used to have on his wall. if anyone has an image, i would dearly love
a copy. advthanksance.
randy
At 5:19 PM -0500 12/4/12, Wes George wrote:
Is there an IETF standard format for handling inline quote replies?
Yes, RFC 3676.
Is it just not implemented in certain mail clients?
Sadly, yes.
--
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;facts are suspect;I speak for myself only
At 11:43 AM -0800 12/9/12, S Moonesamy wrote:
Dave Cridland mentioned RFC 3676 [3]. He pointed out that it
primarily useful in simple replies rather than quoting.
Just to clarify: Dave didn't say that RFC 3676 is not useful for
quoting (indeed, quoting is one of it's main points). Dave poi
At 11:40 AM -0900 12/9/12, Melinda Shore wrote:
I'm increasingly not a fan of process documents. It may be the case
that we need a process document addressing the problem of excessive
process documents. I hope that where your efforts end up is a wiki
page or some such, which I think would
1 - 100 of 448 matches
Mail list logo
