IETF Discussion (date)
August 31, 2002
- Re: frequency analysis, Perry E. Metzger, 16:04
- Re: frequency analysis, David J. Aronson, 10:43
- Re: frequency analysis, Steven M. Bellovin, 09:26
- RE: Multihoming Issues, Michel Py, 09:17
- Re: frequency analysis, David J. Aronson, 08:57
- Re: ICANN, .org & " a total lack of technical due diligence", Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law, 07:28
- Re: Multihoming Issues, Caitlin Bestler, 06:02
August 30, 2002
- RE: Multihoming Issues, Michel Py, 19:15
- Re: Multihoming Issues, Mr. James W. Laferriere, 17:25
- Re: Multihoming Issues, J. Noel Chiappa, 16:15
- Re: Multihoming Issues, Scott Bradner, 15:20
- Re: Multihoming Issues, David Conrad, 14:51
- Re: ICANN, .org & " a total lack of technical due diligence", Gordon Cook, 14:02
- Re: frequency analysis, Valdis . Kletnieks, 13:50
- Re: ICANN, .org & " a total lack of technical due diligence", Carl Malamud, 12:56
- Re: frequency analysis, John Stracke, 12:56
- Re: Multihoming Issues, Fred Baker, 12:46
- Re: ICANN, .org & " a total lack of technical due diligence", Bob Braden, 12:36
- frequency analysis, David J. Aronson, 12:23
- [ij(_at_)w3(_dot_)org: First public WD of "Architectural Principles of the World Wide Web"], Michael Mealling, 12:09
- ICANN, .org & " a total lack of technical due diligence", Gordon Cook, 12:06
- Re: Multihoming Issues, Joe Abley, 11:23
- Re: Multihoming Issues, Valdis . Kletnieks, 11:18
- Re: Comment (RFC 2463), Valdis . Kletnieks, 11:06
- Comment (RFC 2463), coursemate groupsix, 09:01
- Multihoming Issues, Sister Sibling, 08:45
- Nomcom Last Call for Volunteers, Phil Roberts, 06:27
- RE: Antwort: TLS Compression Methods, Hollenbeck, Scott, 05:14
August 22, 2002
- Warning: Material considered inappropriate for IETF list, Harald Alvestrand, 23:46
- Re: am i the only one..., James M Galvin, 13:50
- IP over MPEG-2 Transport, Narayan, Krishnan, 13:44
- Re: am i the only one..., Steve Coya, 13:41
- Re: am i the only one..., Dominic Pinto, 09:03
- Re: am i the only one..., Bill Manning, 08:59
- Re: MUST/SHOULD and related terminology, C. M. Heard, 08:39
- Re: am i the only one..., mstjohns, 08:23
- Re: am i the only one..., Valdis . Kletnieks, 07:59
- Re: am i the only one..., Stephen Sprunk, 07:09
- Re: am i the only one..., Donald Eastlake 3rd, 06:59
- Re: am i the only one..., Robert Elz, 06:23
August 21, 2002
- Re: am i the only one..., Ian Cooper, 23:59
- Re: am i the only one..., Eliot Lear, 23:34
- Re: am i the only one..., Pekka Savola, 23:29
- am i the only one..., Eliot Lear, 22:03
- RE: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, Franck Martin, 16:47
- Re: MUST/SHOULD and related terminology, Fred Baker, 10:11
- Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, Keith Moore, 09:02
- MUST/SHOULD and related terminology, Martin Duerst, 07:19
- RE: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, Franck Martin, 02:21
- smtpng, Bill Cunningham, 00:22
August 20, 2002
- Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, Valdis . Kletnieks, 23:16
- Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, John C Klensin, 21:23
- Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, John C Klensin, 21:04
- Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, william, 18:53
- Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, Dave Crocker, 18:33
- 3:219 INFO....Mirrored Registry, Jim Fleming, 17:09
- Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, william, 15:43
- Re: SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, Valdis . Kletnieks, 14:59
- SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org, william, 14:29
- RE: writing congress about spam, Dan Wing, 14:23
- Re: writing congress about spam, Peter Saint-Andre, 13:29
- Re: Why spam is a problem, Greg Skinner, 13:23
- Re: writing congress about spam, Fred Baker, 12:39
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Eric A. Hall, 11:33
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Valdis . Kletnieks, 11:13
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, David Morris, 10:49
- 0:190 ORG.....32-bit DNS "Mirrored Registries", Jim Fleming, 06:15
- Re: One SPAM side effect, Harald Tveit Alvestrand, 01:39
- Re: on UCE: Possible Interest (fwd), Einar Stefferud, 00:39
August 19, 2002
- Re: on UCE: Possible Interest (fwd), Eric A. Hall, 23:10
- Re: writing congress about spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 21:12
- Re: writing congress about spam, Richard Shockey, 20:49
- Re: Spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 20:36
- Re: Spam, James Seng, 20:08
- More on UCE, James Seng, 20:02
- Spam, Bill Cunningham, 19:53
- Re: on UCE: Possible Interest (fwd), Eric A. Hall, 19:25
- Re: on UCE: Possible Interest (fwd), Larry Smith, 18:27
- Re: on UCE: Possible Interest (fwd), Donald Eastlake 3rd, 17:53
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Claus Färber, 17:44
- Re: bandwidth, Joel Jaeggli, 16:31
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Joe Baptista, 14:13
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Joe Baptista, 14:10
- Re: on UCE: Possible Interest (fwd), Vernon Schryver, 12:53
- Re: writing congress about spam, Dan Wing, 10:44
- Re: on UCE: Possible Interest (fwd), Valdis . Kletnieks, 10:40
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Vernon Schryver, 10:03
- Private Reply to Fred Baker... My Apology, Brian Bisaillon, 09:53
- Re: Why spam is a problem., John C Klensin, 09:50
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Fred Baker, 09:30
- Re: Heartbeat between Router and 3rd party box, Fred Baker, 09:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., John Stracke, 09:13
- Re: Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act, Brian Bisaillon, 09:08
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, John Stracke, 08:59
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Dave Crocker, 08:54
- Re[2]: Why Spam is a problem, Richard Welty, 08:50
- RE: bandwidth, TOMSON ERIC, 08:44
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Brian Bisaillon, 08:40
- What does a /8 Lease For ?, Jim Fleming, 08:33
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, John Stracke, 08:29
- Re: Heartbeat between Router and 3rd party box, Vernon Schryver, 08:23
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Vernon Schryver, 08:09
- Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act, Brian Bisaillon, 07:49
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Henning Schulzrinne, 07:39
- Re: Heartbeat between Router and 3rd party box, Fred Baker, 07:33
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, John Stracke, 07:29
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, John Stracke, 07:22
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, John Stracke, 07:14
- Re: on UCE: Possible Interest (fwd), Donald Eastlake 3rd, 06:23
- RE: bandwidth, Edward Lewis, 06:01
- RE: bandwidth, TOMSON ERIC, 02:04
- RE: bandwidth, TOMSON ERIC, 02:01
- Re: on UCE: Possible Interest (fwd), Jan Meijer, 01:29
August 18, 2002
- Re: bandwidth, Bill Cunningham, 21:44
- on UCE: Possible Interest (fwd), Rick Wesson, 20:50
- Re: bandwidth, Benny Nasution, 19:39
- bandwidth, Bill Cunningham, 18:50
- Heartbeat between Router and 3rd party box, Voreniza S, 04:24
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Claus Färber, 04:04
August 17, 2002
- Re: writing congress about spam, Doug, 16:03
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Vernon Schryver, 15:39
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Dave Crocker, 15:02
- Re: Why spam is a problem., SRIMURUGIAN KOTIESWARAN, 14:58
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Vernon Schryver, 14:39
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Fred Baker, 12:09
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Bill Cunningham, 11:13
- writing congress about spam, Eliot Lear, 10:59
- What does a /8 Lease For ?, Jim Fleming, 09:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 09:03
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Vernon Schryver, 08:04
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Anthony Atkielski, 07:41
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Jacob Palme, 03:14
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Jacob Palme, 03:11
August 16, 2002
- "...IETF meetings should continue to be the main venue..." ??, Jim Fleming, 17:40
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Fred Baker, 16:23
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, stanislav shalunov, 16:08
- Re: One SPAM side effect, Dave Crocker, 15:53
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Dave Crocker, 15:48
- Re: One SPAM side effect, Perry E. Metzger, 15:32
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Perry E. Metzger, 15:29
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Perry E. Metzger, 15:22
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, John Stracke, 14:23
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, stanislav shalunov, 13:39
- Re: One SPAM side effect, Aaron Falk, 13:32
- Re: One SPAM side effect, Randy Bush, 13:23
- One SPAM side effect, Bob Braden, 12:41
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Keith Moore, 11:59
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, John Stracke, 11:49
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Brian Bisaillon, 11:43
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Alex Audu, 11:38
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Brian Bisaillon, 11:33
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, stanislav shalunov, 11:13
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Frank Solensky, 10:39
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Keith Moore, 10:33
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Valdis . Kletnieks, 10:29
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Doug Royer, 10:23
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Bill Cunningham, 09:59
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Einar Stefferud, 09:50
- Re[2]: Why Spam is a problem, Richard Welty, 09:09
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Vernon Schryver, 08:53
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Fred Baker, 08:50
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Brian Bisaillon, 07:53
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Keith Moore, 07:50
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Perry E. Metzger, 06:49
- Why Spam is a Problem, Bill Cunningham, 04:53
- Re[2]: Why Spam is a problem, Richard Welty, 04:42
- RE: Why Spam is a problem, Gream, Matthew, 04:39
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Bill Cunningham, 04:23
- Re[2]: Why Spam is a problem, Richard Welty, 04:13
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Einar Stefferud, 01:23
August 15, 2002
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Eric A. Hall, 23:13
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Anthony Atkielski, 21:49
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, John C Klensin, 19:59
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Perry E. Metzger, 19:13
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Eric A. Hall, 17:09
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Eric A. Hall, 16:53
- Re[2]: Why Spam is a problem, Richard Welty, 16:28
- Why spam is a problem, Bill Cunningham, 16:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 15:03
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Fred Baker, 14:39
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Vernon Schryver, 12:41
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 12:00
- Re: Why spam is a problem., stanislav shalunov, 11:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Vernon Schryver, 10:59
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Keith Moore, 10:53
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 10:49
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Eric A. Hall, 10:32
- Re: Why spam is a problem., kent, 10:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., John Stracke, 08:29
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Vernon Schryver, 08:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Brian Bisaillon, 08:03
- Re: Why People Should NOT Depend on "Root Servers", Jim Fleming, 07:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., stanislav shalunov, 07:12
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Keith Moore, 07:09
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Eric A. Hall, 07:03
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 06:53
- Re: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Keith Moore, 05:49
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Jan Meijer, 05:33
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Claus Färber, 04:58
- Re[2]: Why Spam is a problem, Richard Welty, 04:54
- Re: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Bruce Campbell, 01:03
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Perry E. Metzger, 00:53
- RE: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Dave Crocker, 00:43
August 14, 2002
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Vernon Schryver, 23:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Andrew Rutherford, 23:03
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Pekka Savola, 22:39
- Re: Why People Should NOT Depend on "Root Servers", todd glassey, 20:52
- Re: Why People Should NOT Depend on "Root Servers", Donald Eastlake 3rd, 20:09
- Re: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Einar Stefferud, 19:33
- Re: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Theodore Ts'o, 18:45
- Re: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Paul Hoffman / IMC, 16:59
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Bill Cunningham, 15:59
- RE: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Joe Baptista, 15:33
- RE: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Einar Stefferud, 14:59
- [FROM CYBERIA] ICANN Reform suggestions by Markle Foundation, Joe Baptista, 13:43
- Re: Why spam is a problem., stanislav shalunov, 13:39
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Gary E. Miller, 13:33
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Perry E. Metzger, 13:29
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Peter Deutsch, 13:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Theodore Ts'o, 13:03
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Bill Cunningham, 12:29
- Re: Why spam is a problem., stanislav shalunov, 12:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 11:59
- Re: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Theodore Ts'o, 11:53
- CALL FOR PAPERS - SAC2003, Turgay Korkmaz, 11:13
- RE: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Daniel Senie, 10:59
- RE: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Brian Bisaillon, 10:49
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Vernon Schryver, 10:42
- Re: Re[2]: Why spam is a problem., Ted Gavin, 10:39
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Brian Bisaillon, 10:33
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 10:29
- IP"NG" and IPv6 are not the same thing...., Jim Fleming, 10:27
- Does this mean that the CISCO private jets do not have 24x7 Internet ?, Jim Fleming, 10:09
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Bob Braden, 10:03
- Re: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Keith Moore, 09:59
- RE: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Christian Huitema, 09:53
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Perry E. Metzger, 09:49
- Re: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Dave Crocker, 09:44
- Re: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Dave Crocker, 09:41
- Re: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Russ Allbery, 09:33
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Melinda Shore, 09:29
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Perry E. Metzger, 09:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Thomas J. Hruska, 08:59
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Ole J. Jacobsen, 08:49
- Re: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Keith Moore, 08:33
- Fw: "I can still see it feasible to have all secretariat services funded by ICANN's budget.", Jim Fleming, 08:29
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Ted Gavin, 08:24
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Melinda Shore, 08:14
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Thomas J. Hruska, 07:49
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 07:43
- RE: Why spam is a problem., Louis Davidson, 07:40
- Re: Why spam is a problem., JFC (Jefsey) Morfin, 07:33
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Vernon Schryver, 07:29
- Re: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Theodore Ts'o, 07:14
- Re: IETF announce list and spam filtering, Pekka Savola, 06:59
- Re: Urgh, ube/spam. time to change the subject line.., Randy Bush, 06:43
- IETF announce list and spam filtering, Theodore Ts'o, 06:40
- Re[2]: Why spam is a problem., Richard Welty, 05:09
- Re[2]: Why spam is a problem., Richard Welty, 04:29
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Richard Welty, 04:24
- RE: Why spam is a problem., Franck Martin, 04:13
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Anthony Atkielski, 04:10
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Anthony Atkielski, 04:03
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Anthony Atkielski, 04:00
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Måns Nilsson, 01:59
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Måns Nilsson, 01:39
- Urgh, ube/spam. time to change the subject line.., Christopher Evans, 00:59
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Eric A. Hall, 00:09
August 13, 2002
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Marty Borden, 21:49
- Re: Why spam is a problem., John C Klensin, 21:28
- Re: Why spam is a problem., senthil ayyasamy, 21:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Dave Crocker, 21:09
- Re[2]: Why spam is a problem., Richard Welty, 21:03
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law, 20:59
- RE: Why spam is a problem., Franck Martin, 20:49
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Jim Fleming, 20:43
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Eric A. Hall, 20:39
- Re: Why Spam is a problem, Bill Cunningham, 20:34
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 20:28
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Bill Sommerfeld, 20:22
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 20:12
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 20:09
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Dave Crocker, 19:53
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Thomas J. Hruska, 19:32
- RE: Why spam is a problem., Christian Huitema, 19:28
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 19:23
- Why Spam is a problem, Bill Cunningham, 19:08
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Vernon Schryver, 19:03
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Perry E. Metzger, 18:43
- RE: Why spam is a problem., william, 18:28
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Thomas J. Hruska, 18:23
- Re: What on earth is the difference in broadcast and Multicast?, Fred Baker, 18:13
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Perry E. Metzger, 18:09
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 18:03
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Donald Eastlake 3rd, 17:59
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Perry E. Metzger, 17:53
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Christopher Evans, 17:49
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 17:43
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Eric A. Hall, 17:39
- Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: Why People Should NOT Depend on "Root Servers", Jeff Williams, 17:33
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 17:29
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 17:23
- What on earth is the difference in broadcast and Multicast?, Jian Bo Huang, 17:15
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 16:53
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 16:49
- Re: Re[2]: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 16:43
- ICANN now Paying for the GAC, Gordon Cook, 16:12
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Vernon Schryver, 16:03
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Vernon Schryver, 15:49
- RE: Why spam is a problem., Franck Martin, 15:43
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Bob Braden, 15:39
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Russ Allbery, 15:33
- Re: Why spam is a problem., John Stracke, 15:28
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Russ Allbery, 15:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Eric A. Hall, 15:03
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Jeffrey I. Schiller, 14:58
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Markku Savela, 14:52
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Perry E. Metzger, 14:49
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Måns Nilsson, 14:43
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Eric A. Hall, 14:39
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Franck Martin, 14:29
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Christopher Evans, 14:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Pekka Savola, 14:13
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Marshall Rose, 14:09
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Vernon Schryver, 14:03
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Tony Hansen, 13:59
- Re[2]: Why spam is a problem., Richard Welty, 13:52
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Eric A. Hall, 13:49
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Perry E. Metzger, 13:39
- Re[2]: Why spam is a problem., Richard Welty, 13:33
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Markku Savela, 13:29
- Re[2]: Why spam is a problem., Richard Welty, 13:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 13:15
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Adam Shostack, 13:10
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 12:53
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law, 12:43
- Re: Why spam is a problem., David J. Aronson, 12:39
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 12:29
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Karl Auerbach, 12:23
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Perry E. Metzger, 12:13
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 12:08
- Re: Why spam is a problem., william, 12:02
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Eric A. Hall, 11:59
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law, 11:39
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Keith Moore, 11:32
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Caitlin Bestler, 11:29
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Aaron Falk, 11:13
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Perry E. Metzger, 11:09
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Billy Biggs, 11:06
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Perry E. Metzger, 11:02
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Caitlin Bestler, 10:53
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Ted Gavin, 10:48
- Re: Why spam is a problem., william, 10:43
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Henning Schulzrinne, 10:23
- Re: Why People Should NOT Depend on "Root Servers", John Stracke, 10:13
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Perry E. Metzger, 09:58
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Carsten Bormann, 09:53
- RE: Why spam is a problem., Christian Huitema, 09:49
- Re: Why People Should NOT Depend on "Root Servers", Jim Fleming, 09:29
- Re: Why spam is a problem., Jim Fleming, 09:24
- Re: Why People Should NOT Depend on "Root Servers", Stephen Sprunk, 09:03
- Why spam is a problem., Perry E. Metzger, 08:49
- Re: Why People Should NOT Depend on "Root Servers", todd glassey, 08:23
- Re: Why People Should NOT Depend on "Root Servers", Jim Fleming, 07:39
- Why People Should NOT Depend on "Root Servers", Jim Fleming, 07:10
- RFC2627, Beni Arazi, 06:30
August 12, 2002
- Re: US Communication Act (47 USC 230 (f)(1)), JFC (Jefsey) Morfin, 14:14
- RE: RFC Nos., Tony Hain, 13:02
- Re: US Communication Act (47 USC 230 (f)(1)), Scott Brim, 11:27
- Re: US Communication Act (47 USC 230 (f)(1)), Robert Cannon, 11:08
- Re: US Communication Act (47 USC 230 (f)(1)), John Morris, 08:13
- Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root, Donald Eastlake 3rd, 06:40
- Re: RFC Nos., Michael StJohns, 06:25
August 09, 2002
- Re: US Communication Act (47 USC 230 (f)(1)), Steven M. Bellovin, 22:29
- ?:? .COOP, Jim Fleming, 18:30
- 0:212 BIZ, Jim Fleming, 13:54
- nomcom announcement - please volunteer, Phil Roberts, 06:03
- US Communication Act (47 USC 230 (f)(1)), JFC (Jefsey) Morfin, 04:12
August 08, 2002
- Re: PTR records and software support (was Re: Revisiting DNS Nota tion, Bill Manning, 17:23
- RE: PTR records and software support (was Re: Revisiting DNS Nota tion, Joe Baptista, 17:03
- RE: PTR records and software support (was Re: Revisiting DNS Nota tion, Franck Martin, 16:09
- Re: PTR records and software support (was Re: Revisiting DNS Notation, Vernon Schryver, 14:49
- Re: Revisiting The DNS Notation Backwardsness Problem and Multiple Parallel Root Server Clusters, Stephen Sprunk, 12:29
- Re: Revisiting DNS Notation, Valdis . Kletnieks, 12:24
- Re: PTR records and software support (was Re: Revisiting DNS Notation, Bill Manning, 12:03
- Re: Revisiting DNS Notation, John Stracke, 11:39
- Re: Revisiting DNS Notation, Mohsen BANAN, 11:04
- Re: PTR records and software support (was Re: Revisiting DNS Notation, John Stracke, 10:43
- PTR records and software support (was Re: Revisiting DNS Notation, Valdis . Kletnieks, 09:55
- Re: Revisiting The DNS Notation Backwardsness Problem andMultiple Parallel Root Server Clusters, Brian E Carpenter, 04:44
August 07, 2002
- Re: Revisiting The DNS Notation Backwardsness Problem and Multiple Parallel Root Server Clusters, Dave Crocker, 20:23
- Revisiting The DNS Notation Backwardsness Problem and Multiple Parallel Root Server Clusters, Mohsen BANAN, 19:23
- RE: [Feedback] Word Template, Jiwoong Lee, 17:49
- [no subject], Bill Cunningham, 17:44
- Fwd: Re: Revisiting - Re: Now: Next Generation Domains and DNS -- Was: Re: No More Central Authority: Not NSI/ICANN! Not ORSC!, Einar Stefferud, 11:03
- Re: Raising and lowering the roof of the DNS;-)..., Einar Stefferud, 10:13
- "Technical solutions for social problems almost never work", Keith Moore, 09:59
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Einar Stefferud, 09:53
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Keith Moore, 08:50
- Re: Revisiting - Re: Now: Next Generation Domains and DNS -- Was: Re: No More Central Authority: Not NSI/ICANN! Not ORSC!, Jim Fleming, 08:35
- RE: Using MS Word template, Fred Baker, 08:31
- Re: Raising and lowering the roof of the DNS;-)..., Valdis . Kletnieks, 08:23
- Re: Raising and lowering the roof of the DNS;-)..., Jim Fleming, 08:14
- RE: results of .... election, Joanna Lane, 08:09
- Re: 0:212 BIZ, Einar Stefferud, 08:03
- RE: results of .... election, Joanna Lane, 07:59
- Re: Revisiting - Re: Now: Next Generation Domains and DNS -- Was: Re: No More Central Authority: Not NSI/ICANN! Not ORSC!, Einar Stefferud, 07:55
- RE: Jim Fleming's posting privilleges have been revoked, TOMSON ERIC, 07:29
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Einar Stefferud, 07:24
- Raising and lowering the roof of the DNS;-)..., Einar Stefferud, 07:13
- "VeriSign is committed to expanding and serving the global Internet community.", Jim Fleming, 07:09
- Re: results of .... election, Jim Fleming, 06:29
- 5:194 INC.....Re: 0:212 BIZ, Jim Fleming, 06:23
August 06, 2002
- Re: 0:212 BIZ, Jim Fleming, 23:43
- Re: 0:212 BIZ, Wonko_The_Sane, 23:36
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Dave Crocker, 22:23
- Re: 0:212 BIZ, Jim Fleming, 21:53
- Re: 0:212 BIZ, Jim Fleming, 21:13
- RE: Using MS Word template, Craig Williams, 21:09
- Re: results of .... election, Jim Fleming, 21:03
- Re: 0:212 BIZ, Einar Stefferud, 20:59
- Re: Using MS Word template, Aaron Falk, 20:39
- results of .... election, Jim Fleming, 19:29
- Using MS Word template, Jiwoong Lee, 17:33
- Re: Revisiting - Re: Now: Next Generation Domains and DNS -- Was: Re: No More Central Authority: Not NSI/ICAN! Not ORSC!, Caitlin Bestler, 17:29
- 0:212 BIZ, Jim Fleming, 17:11
- Re: Revisiting - Re: Now: Next Generation Domains and DNS -- Was: Re: No More Central Authority: Not NSI/ICAN! Not ORSC!, JFC (Jefsey) Morfin, 17:00
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Dave Crocker, 16:33
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Einar Stefferud, 16:04
- Re: Revisiting - Re: Now: Next Generation Domains and DNS -- Was: Re: No More Central Authority: Not NSI/ICAN! Not ORSC!, Dave Crocker, 14:33
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Valdis . Kletnieks, 14:22
- Re: Revisiting - Re: Now: Next Generation Domains and DNS -- Was: Re: No More Central Authority: Not NSI/ICAN! Not ORSC!, Fred Baker, 14:04
- Re: Revisiting - Re: Now: Next Generation Domains and DNS -- Was: Re: No More Central Authority: Not NSI/ICAN! Not ORSC!, Stephen Sprunk, 13:23
- Re: Revisiting - Re: Now: Next Generation Domains and DNS -- Was: Re: No More Central Authority: Not NSI/ICAN! Not ORSC!, Dave Crocker, 12:43
- Revisiting - Re: Now: Next Generation Domains and DNS -- Was: Re: No More Central Authority: Not NSI/ICAN! Not ORSC!, Mohsen BANAN, 12:22
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Einar Stefferud, 12:03
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Einar Stefferud, 11:59
- Re[2]: Unified RFC Protocol..., Timur Shemsedinov, 08:03
- 2002 3:219 .INFO, Jim Fleming, 07:59
- Re: Unified RFC Protocol..., Timur Shemsedinov, 07:42
- Re: information on SMTP error code, Keith Moore, 07:33
- Re[2]: Unified RFC Protocol..., Timur Shemsedinov, 06:49
- RE: get technical, please? , Re: Trees have one root, JFC (Jefsey) Morfin, 03:13
August 05, 2002
- Re: information on SMTP error code, Russ Allbery, 21:49
- information on SMTP error code, Franck Martin, 21:29
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Keith Moore, 14:15
- RE: get technical, please? , Re: Trees have one root, Tony Hain, 14:10
- Re: Regulation of information services, Richard Shockey, 13:40
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Keith Moore, 12:30
- Re: Regulation of information services, Michael Hammer, 11:30
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Einar Stefferud, 11:27
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Keith Moore, 10:29
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Keith Moore, 10:23
- Regulation of information services, Michael Hammer, 10:09
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Joe Baptista, 10:03
- Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root, Einar Stefferud, 09:53
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Melinda Shore, 09:34
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Einar Stefferud, 09:14
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Einar Stefferud, 09:11
- Re: ECN and ISOC... tcptraceroutes needed, Sally Floyd, 08:59
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Einar Stefferud, 08:54
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Einar Stefferud, 08:49
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law, 08:43
- Re: Unified RFC Protocol..., John Stracke, 08:39
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), John Stracke, 08:33
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Einar Stefferud, 08:30
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Tom Lord, 08:27
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Tom Lord, 08:13
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Tom Lord, 08:09
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Tom Lord, 08:05
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., John Stracke, 07:09
- Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root, Dave Crocker, 07:04
August 04, 2002
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Melinda Shore, 13:25
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Perry E. Metzger, 12:09
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Einar Stefferud, 11:39
- Re: network development History, Joe Touch, 10:14
- network development History, JFC (Jefsey) Morfin, 07:50
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Melinda Shore, 05:24
August 03, 2002
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Perry E. Metzger, 20:43
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Perry E. Metzger, 20:23
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Einar Stefferud, 20:14
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Gordon Cook, 19:24
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Melinda Shore, 18:40
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Einar Stefferud, 02:01
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Einar Stefferud, 01:41
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Dave Crocker, 00:05
August 02, 2002
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Gordon Cook, 21:15
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Caitlin Bestler, 20:29
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Donald Eastlake 3rd, 18:53
- Re: ECN and ISOC... tcptraceroutes needed, Franck Martin, 17:56
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Gordon Cook, 17:36
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Russ Allbery, 16:29
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Joe Baptista, 16:13
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Russ Allbery, 16:09
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Dave Crocker, 15:53
- ECN and ISOC... tcptraceroutes needed, Franck Martin, 15:33
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Einar Stefferud, 15:29
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Keith Moore, 15:09
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Matt Larson, 15:03
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Keith Moore, 14:53
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Dave Crocker, 14:43
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Valdis . Kletnieks, 14:39
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Einar Stefferud, 14:29
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Russ Allbery, 14:23
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Joe Baptista, 14:13
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Einar Stefferud, 14:09
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Joe Baptista, 14:03
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Bill Manning, 13:59
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Keith Moore, 13:32
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Joe Baptista, 13:29
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Donald Eastlake 3rd, 13:23
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Joe Baptista, 13:03
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), David Conrad, 12:53
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Valdis . Kletnieks, 12:39
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Keith Moore, 12:33
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Stephen Sprunk, 12:29
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Peter Deutsch, 12:23
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Joe Baptista, 12:13
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Peter Deutsch, 12:09
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Joe Baptista, 12:03
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Valdis . Kletnieks, 11:50
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Keith Moore, 11:39
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., vinton g. cerf, 11:33
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Stephen Sprunk, 11:30
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Keith Moore, 11:10
- Re: Unified RFC Protocol..., Thomas J. Hruska, 09:29
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., James_Renkel, 09:24
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law, 06:49
- Re: Unified RFC Protocol..., Timur Shemsedinov, 06:39
- nomcom call for volunteers, Phil Roberts, 05:29
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Einar Stefferud, 00:51
August 01, 2002
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Dave Crocker, 22:00
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Randy Bush, 21:24
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., vinton g. cerf, 21:14
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Joe Baptista, 21:10
- Let's read what the court said rather than imagine Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Gordon Cook, 20:10
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Dave Crocker, 19:39
- Re: Unified RFC Protocol..., Caitlin Bestler, 19:09
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Joe Baptista, 19:03
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), JFC (Jefsey) Morfin, 18:53
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Randy Bush, 18:49
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., vinton g. cerf, 18:33
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Randy Bush, 18:29
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., vinton g. cerf, 18:00
- Re: Unified RFC Protocol..., Thomas J. Hruska, 16:11
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Bob Braden, 15:41
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Dave Crocker, 15:14
- Unified RFC Protocol..., Thomas J. Hruska, 15:11
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law, 14:54
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Joe Baptista, 14:50
- RE: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mecha nism..., Franck Martin, 14:44
- Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Dave Crocker, 14:41
- Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root, Peter Deutsch, 14:34
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), John C Klensin, 14:30
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law, 14:25
- Re: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Bruce Campbell, 13:25
- Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root, Valdis . Kletnieks, 12:33
- Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism..., Karl Auerbach, 12:09
- Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root, Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law, 11:03
- Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root, Dave Crocker, 10:24
- RE: way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), Sean Jones, 09:30
- way out of the DNS problems? (former Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root), JFC (Jefsey) Morfin, 08:01
- Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root, Valdis . Kletnieks, 01:41
- Re: delegation mechanism, Re: Trees have one root, Dave Crocker, 00:40