IETF Discussion

• Thread Index

• Re: pgp signing in van
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: pgp signing in van
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: Bruce Schneier's Proposal to dedicate November meeting to saving the Internet from the NSA
  • From: cb.list6
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Bruce Schneier's Proposal to dedicate November meeting to saving the Internet from the NSA
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Bruce Schneier's Proposal to dedicate November meeting to saving the Internet from the NSA
  • From: Lucy Lynch
• pgp signing in van
  • From: Randy Bush
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: SM
• Bruce Schneier's Proposal to dedicate November meeting to saving the Internet from the NSA
  • From: Dean Willis
• Unbearable related to misspellings ideas (was Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis)
  • From: Abdussalam Baryun
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Jari Arkko
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: REVISED Last Call: <draft-ietf-pwe3-vccv-impl-survey-results-02.txt> (The Pseudowire (PW) & Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV) Implementation Survey Results) to Informational RFC
  • From: Abdussalam Baryun
• Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopriv-res-gw-lis-discovery-05
  • From: Martin Thomson
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Scott O Bradner
• Re: REVISED Last Call: <draft-ietf-pwe3-vccv-impl-survey-results-02.txt> (The Pseudowire (PW) & Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV) Implementation Survey Results) to Informational RFC
  • From: Andrew G. Malis
• Re: "Deprecate"
  • From: t.p.
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: New Mailing List: Internet governance and IETF technical work
  • From: Arturo Servin
• Re: New Mailing List: Internet governance and IETF technical work
  • From: Abdussalam Baryun
• Re: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt)
  • From: Masataka Ohta
• Re: REVISED Last Call: <draft-ietf-pwe3-vccv-impl-survey-results-02.txt> (The Pseudowire (PW) & Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV) Implementation Survey Results) to Informational RFC
  • From: Abdussalam Baryun
• RE: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: SM
• Piling on [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-kaplan-insipid-session-id-03.txt
  • From: James Polk
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Spencer Dawkins
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Randy Bush
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Scott Brim
• RE: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: mohamed.boucadair
• RE: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: mohamed.boucadair
• RE: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: mohamed.boucadair
• RE: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: mohamed.boucadair
• Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: Lorenzo Colitti
• Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: Lorenzo Colitti
• Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: Lorenzo Colitti
• Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: Gert Doering
• RE: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: david.binet
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Barry Leiba
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Olaf Kolkman
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Melinda Shore
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Melinda Shore
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: SM
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Spencer Dawkins
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Ted Lemon
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Spencer Dawkins
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Bradner, Scott
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Scott O. Bradner
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Barry Leiba
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Barry Leiba
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: [apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Douglas Otis
• RE: Vancouver meeting is coming up fast
  • From: Fabian Jr
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Eduardo A. Suárez
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Eduardo A. Suárez
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Scott O Bradner
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Spencer Dawkins
• Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Bradner, Scott
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Jari Arkko
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Scott Brim
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Olaf Kolkman
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Scott Brim
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Vancouver meeting is coming up fast
  • From: IETF Chair
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Jari Arkko
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Creating an umbrella group for Network Sync Protocols
  • From: todd
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Scott O Bradner
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: making our meetings more worth the time/expense
  • From: Stewart Bryant
• Re: PS Characterization Clarified
  • From: Jari Arkko
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: David Conrad
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: John Levine
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt)
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Barry Leiba
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Abdussalam Baryun
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Melinda Shore
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: William McCall
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt)
  • From: Masataka Ohta
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Scott Brim
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Phill
• draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis
  • From: Melinda Shore
• Re: [IAB] Call for Volunteers to Serve on the ICANN Nominating Committee
  • From: Russ Housley
• Re: Call for Volunteers to Serve on the ICANN Nominating Committee
  • From: Patrik Fältström
• Re: Call for Volunteers to Serve on the ICANN Nominating Committee
  • From: IAB Chair
• Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Murray S. Kucherawy
• Re: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt)
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Is the datatracker authoritative (was: WG Review: Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc))
  • From: Ted Lemon
• Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Roni Even
• Re: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt)
  • From: manning bill
• Re: Is the datatracker authoritative (was: WG Review: Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc))
  • From: Jari Arkko
• Re: Is the datatracker authoritative (was: WG Review: Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc))
  • From: Andrew Sullivan
• Is the datatracker authoritative (was: WG Review: Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc))
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: WG Review: Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc)
  • From: Ted Lemon
• Re: [apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Andrew Sullivan
• Re: WG Review: Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc)
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: AppsDir review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: AppsDir review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Andrew Sullivan
• Re: AppsDir review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: AppsDir review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Tony Hansen
• Re: AppsDir review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: Mail lost yesterday
  • From: Yoav Nir
• Re: AppsDir review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Murray S. Kucherawy
• Re: AppsDir review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Andrew Sullivan
• Re: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt)
  • From: Patrik Fältström
• Re: Mail lost yesterday
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: AppsDir review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt)
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: AppsDir review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Andrew Sullivan
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: AppsDir review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt)
  • From: Michelle Cotton
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Bob Braden
• Re: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt)
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt)
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dan Schlitt
• AppsDir review of draft-ietf-repute-model-08
  • From: Tony Hansen
• Re: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt)
  • From: Cyrus Daboo
• Re: Mail lost yesterday
  • From: SM
• Re: An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt)
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• An IANA Registry for DNS TXT RDATA (I-D Action: draft-klensin-iana-txt-rr-registry-00.txt)
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Mail lost yesterday
  • From: Mary Barnes
• Re: Mail lost yesterday
  • From: Jari Arkko
• Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-repute-media-type-10
  • From: Peter Yee
• Re: Mail lost yesterday
  • From: SM
• Mailman service interruption yesterday
  • From: Glen
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: Mail lost yesterday
  • From: Bob Hinden
• Mail lost yesterday
  • From: SM
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Crocker
• LC comments on draft-cotton-rfc4020bis-01.txt
  • From: Eric Rosen
• Re: External link to article on trends in anti-surveillance design
  • From: Scott Brim
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Murray S. Kucherawy
• RE: Gen-ART LC review ofdraft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
  • From: Roni Even
• Re: External link to article on trends in anti-surveillance design
  • From: Ted Lemon
• Re: Last Call: <draft-cotton-rfc4020bis-01.txt> (Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Code Points) to Best Current Practice
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: External link to article on trends in anti-surveillance design
  • From: Peter Saint-Andre
• External link to article on trends in anti-surveillance design
  • From: Dean Willis
• Re: Last Call: <draft-cotton-rfc4020bis-01.txt> (Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Code Points) to Best Current Practice
  • From: SM
• Re: Last Call: <draft-cotton-rfc4020bis-01.txt> (Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Code Points) to Best Current Practice
  • From: Barry Leiba
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: John C Klensin
• RE: "Deprecate"
  • From: Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
• Re: Last Call: <draft-cotton-rfc4020bis-01.txt> (Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Code Points) to Best Current Practice
  • From: SM
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: SM
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-media-type-10.txt> (A Media Type for Reputation Interchange) to Proposed Standard
  • From: SM
• Re: "Deprecate"
  • From: t.p.
• Re: Gen-ART LC review ofdraft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
  • From: t.p.
• RE: "Deprecate"
  • From: Adrian Farrel
• Re: "Deprecate"
  • From: Michelle Cotton
• Re: Last Call: <draft-cotton-rfc4020bis-01.txt> (Early IANA Allocation ofStandards Track Code Points) to Best Current Practice
  • From: t.p.
• RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
  • From: Roni Even
• RE: "Deprecate"
  • From: Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
• RE: "Deprecate"
  • From: Adrian Farrel
• "Deprecate"
  • From: t.p.
• Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
  • From: Loa Andersson
• RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
  • From: Roni Even
• RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
  • From: Mach Chen
• Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopriv-res-gw-lis-discovery-05
  • From: Jari Arkko
• RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
  • From: Roni Even
• RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
  • From: Mach Chen
• RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
  • From: Roni Even
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Mark Andrews
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
  • From: Loa Andersson
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Patrik Fältström
• Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
  • From: Roni Even
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: charging remote participants
  • From: Simon Pietro Romano
• Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: I-D Action: draft-sweet-uri-zoneid-00.txt
  • From: Bob Hinden
• Re: charging remote participants
  • From: Bernard Aboba
• Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-11
  • From: Jouni Korhonen
• Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  • From: Ted Lemon
• Re: I-D Action: draft-sweet-uri-zoneid-00.txt
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  • From: John Leslie
• Re: Last call: draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn-16.txt
  • From: Andrew Allen
• Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  • From: Ted Lemon
• Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  • From: Melinda Shore
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: Last call: draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn-16.txt
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  • From: Scott Brim
• Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-11
  • From: Ben Campbell
• Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  • From: Ted Lemon
• Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-11
  • From: Black, David
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Joe Abley
• Re: Last call: draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn-16.txt
  • From: Mary Barnes
• Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  • From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
• Re: Rude responses
  • From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: Abdussalam Baryun
• Re: Rude responses (sergeant-at-arms?)
  • From: Tim Chown
• Re: Rude responses
  • From: Abdussalam Baryun
• Overloaded TXT harmful (was" Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Fwd: Re: [dnsext] Deprecating SPF
  • From: Mark Andrews
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Arturo Servin
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Janet P Gunn
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Janet P Gunn
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Randy Presuhn
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Dave Aronson
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Mikael Abrahamsson
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Janet P Gunn
• Fwd: Fred MacMurray's
  • From: Casey Farrell
• Re: [IAOC] GST/PST and IETF 88
  • From: Ray Pelletier
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Jelte Jansen
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Jelte Jansen
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: John R Levine
• RE: [Recentattendees] Huawei is the Host for IETF 88 in Vancouver
  • From: Joachimpillai, Damascene M
• Re: [dnsext] SPF isn't going to change, was Deprecating SPF
  • From: bmanning
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Jelte Jansen
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: John R Levine
• GST/PST and IETF 88
  • From: Michael Richardson
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Jelte Jansen
• RE: Rude responses
  • From: l.wood
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Abdussalam Baryun
• Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt>
  • From: Abdussalam Baryun
• Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: Abdussalam Baryun
• Re: [dnsext] SPF isn't going to change, was Deprecating SPF
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: SPF PTR Support [was SPF isn't going to change]
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: SPF PTR Support [was SPF isn't going to change]
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• SPF PTR Support [was SPF isn't going to change]
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: [dnsext] SPF isn't going to change, was Deprecating SPF
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: [dnsext] SPF isn't going to change, was Deprecating SPF
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: [dnsext] SPF isn't going to change, was Deprecating SPF
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: [dnsext] SPF isn't going to change, was Deprecating SPF
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses)
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses)
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses)
  • From: Hector Santos
• Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: [dnsext] SPF isn't going to change, was Deprecating SPF
  • From: manning bill
• Re: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses)
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: IETF 88 - Registration Now Open!
  • From: Tim Chown
• Re: IETF 88 - Registration Now Open!
  • From: John Levine
• Re: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses)
  • From: Scott Brim
• Re: Fwd: [dnsext] SPF isn't going to change, was Deprecating SPF
  • From: John Levine
• Re: IETF 88 - Registration Now Open!
  • From: manning bill
• Fwd: [dnsext] SPF isn't going to change, was Deprecating SPF
  • From: manning bill
• Re: [dnsext] full standards, Deprecating SPF
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: [netext] Last Call: <draft-ietf-netext-update-notifications-07.txt> (Update Notifications for Proxy Mobile IPv6) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
• Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-10
  • From: Eric McMurry
• Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-trill-directory-framework-07
  • From: Black, David
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-netext-update-notifications-07.txt> (Update Notifications for Proxy Mobile IPv6) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
• RE: [Recentattendees] IETF 88 - Registration Now Open!
  • From: Mishra, Sanjay
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: John Levine
• Huawei to Host IETF 88 in Vancouver!
  • From: IETF Administrative Director
• Visibility of shepherd writeup
  • From: Carsten Bormann
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Jelte Jansen
• RE: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses)
  • From: Dave Cridland
• RE: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses)
  • From: l.wood
• The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses)
  • From: Dave Crocker
• RE: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: l.wood
• Re: [dnsext] Deprecating SPF
  • From: Mark Andrews
• Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-10
  • From: Ben Campbell
• RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-10
  • From: Black, David
• Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: Barry Leiba
• New IETF Trust Chair
  • From: IETF Administrative Director
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: John Levine
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Murray S. Kucherawy
• Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt>
  • From: Aaron Yi DING
• Re: SPFBIS LAST CALL: SenderID Framework (PRA, SUBMITTER)
  • From: S Moonesamy
• RE: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: mohamed.boucadair
• Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: Erik Kline
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Joe Touch
• Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: Thomas Narten
• Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: Scott Brim
• Re: WG Review: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited (stir)
  • From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Olafur Gudmundsson
• SPFBIS LAST CALL: SenderID Framework (PRA, SUBMITTER)
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Jelte Jansen
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Måns Nilsson
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Martin Sustrik
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Martin Sustrik
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: John Leslie
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: David Conrad
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Mark Andrews
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Måns Nilsson
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Mark Andrews
• Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: Stephen Farrell
• Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: Barry Leiba
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Mark Andrews
• Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: Last call of draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Måns Nilsson
• Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: WG Review: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited (stir)
  • From: Hannes Tschofenig
• Re: WG Review: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited (stir)
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: WG Review: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited (stir)
  • From: Christopher Morrow
• Re: WG Review: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited (stir)
  • From: Christopher Morrow
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: WG Review: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited (stir)
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-repute-model-07
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Patrik Fältström
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Olafur Gudmundsson
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: [spfbis] there is no transitiion, was Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt>
  • From: Ted Lemon
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Patrik Fältström
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Bob Braden
• Re: [spfbis] there is no transitiion, was Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt>
  • From: John Levine
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Joe Touch
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Ted Lemon
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Martin Sustrik
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Joe Touch
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Joe Touch
• Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: Owen DeLong
• Re: WG overview - MILE video
  • From: Arturo Servin
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Patrik Fältström
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Alessandro Vesely
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Jelte Jansen
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Andrew Sullivan
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Andrew Sullivan
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Mark Andrews
• Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-repute-model-07
  • From: Roni Even
• WG overview - MILE video
  • From: Moriarty, Kathleen
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: manning bill
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Eliot Lear
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Patrik Fältström
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Eliot Lear
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Patrik Fältström
• RE: [CCAMP] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-11.txt> (Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Adrian Farrel
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Måns Nilsson
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Murray S. Kucherawy
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: SM
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Martin Sustrik
• RE: [CCAMP] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-11.txt> (Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Fatai Zhang
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: David Conrad
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-model-07.txt> (A Model for Reputation Reporting) to Informational RFC
  • From: Murray S. Kucherawy
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-media-type-10.txt> (A Media Type for Reputation Interchange) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Murray S. Kucherawy
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-email-identifiers-08.txt> (A Reputation Response Set for Email Identifiers) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Murray S. Kucherawy
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Murray S. Kucherawy
• Re: Last call: draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn-16.txt
  • From: Andrew Allen
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Andrew Sullivan
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: james woodyatt
• Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database"
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database"
  • From: Tony Hansen
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database"
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database"
  • From: SM
• Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database"
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database"
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: [dnsext] Deprecating SPF
  • From: Patrik Fältström
• Re: [dnsext] Deprecating SPF
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database"
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Last call of draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19
  • From: Patrik Fältström
• RE: [CCAMP] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-11.txt> (Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Adrian Farrel
• Re: [dnsext] Deprecating SPF
  • From: Patrik Fältström
• Re: [dnsext] Deprecating SPF
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: [spfbis] SPF TYPE support
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Andrew Sullivan
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: [spfbis] prefixed names, was Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt>
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: [spfbis] prefixed names, was Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt>
  • From: Mark Andrews
• RE: [Dime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dime-realm-based-redirect-11.txt> (Realm-Based Redirection In Diameter) to Proposed Standard
  • From: lionel.morand
• RE: [Dime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dime-realm-based-redirect-11.txt> (Realm-Based Redirection In Diameter) to Proposed Standard
  • From: lionel.morand
• RE: [Dime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dime-realm-based-redirect-11.txt> (Realm-Based Redirection In Diameter) to Proposed Standard
  • From: lionel.morand
• Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
  • From: Lorenzo Colitti
• RE: Protocol Action: 'RADIUS Option for DHCPv6 Relay Agent' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-radius-opt-14.txt)
  • From: ATEC
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dotzero
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Joe Touch
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Andrew Sullivan
• Re: [spfbis] prefixed names, was Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt>
  • From: John Levine
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: [spfbis] SPF TYPE support
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Martin Sustrik
• Re: [Dime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dime-realm-based-redirect-11.txt> (Realm-Based Redirection In Diameter) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Stefan Winter
• Re: Academic and open source rate
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Patrik Fältström
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: [Dime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dime-realm-based-redirect-11.txt> (Realm-Based Redirection In Diameter) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Stefan Winter
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Patrik Fältström
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: David Conrad
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: SPF TYPE support
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Randy Bush
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: David Conrad
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Mark Andrews
• Re: SPF TYPE support
  • From: Måns Nilsson
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Måns Nilsson
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Andrew Sullivan
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Mark Andrews
• Re: [spfbis] SPF TYPE support
  • From: Ted Lemon
• Re: SPF TYPE support
  • From: S Moonesamy
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: John Levine
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: David Conrad
• Re: SPF TYPE support
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Andrew Sullivan
• SPF TYPE support
  • From: Hector Santos
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Murray S. Kucherawy
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: HLS
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: John Levine
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: SM
• Re: Academic and open source rate
  • From: SM
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Andrew Sullivan
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: John R Levine
• Re: Anyone having trouble submitting I-Ds?
  • From: Robert Sparks
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Måns Nilsson
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: John Levine
• Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Måns Nilsson
• Re: Academic and open source rate
  • From: Arturo Servin
• Re: [rfc-i] [IAOC] Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher
  • From: Nico Williams
• Re: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08
  • From: Carter Bullard
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: Vinayak Hegde
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: John C Klensin
• RE: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08
  • From: Black, David
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Carsten Bormann
• RE: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Larry Masinter
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Tony Finch
• Re: [Dime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dime-realm-based-redirect-11.txt> (Realm-Based Redirection In Diameter) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Stefan Winter
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: SM
• Re: Anyone having trouble submitting I-Ds?
  • From: John Levine
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: John Levine
• Re: Anyone having trouble submitting I-Ds?
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: Vinayak Hegde
• Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants)
  • From: SM
• Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher
  • From: Bert Wijnen (IETF)
• Re: [IAOC] Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher
  • From: Russ Housley
• Re: [IAB] Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher
  • From: Eliot Lear
• Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-10
  • From: Black, David
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Carsten Bormann
• Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher
  • From: Jeffrey Hutzelman
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Stephen Farrell
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Yaron Sheffer
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Yaron Sheffer
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Paul Hoffman
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Henning Schulzrinne
• IAOC Chair
  • From: The IAOC
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: Anyone having trouble submitting I-Ds?
  • From: Benjamin Kaduk
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Scott Kitterman
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher
  • From: David Harrington
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Mark Baugher (mbaugher)
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Joe Hildebrand
• RE: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher
  • From: Adrian Farrel
• Anyone having trouble submitting I-Ds?
  • From: Benjamin Kaduk
• Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-karp-ops-model-07
  • From: Ben Campbell
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Henning Schulzrinne
• Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher
  • From: Stephen Farrell
• Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher
  • From: Sandy Ginoza
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database"
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Melinda Shore
• Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher
  • From: Ray Pelletier
• Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database"
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Joe Touch
• Re: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08
  • From: Sam Hartman
• Re: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08
  • From: Sam Hartman
• Re: [IAB] Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database"
  • From: Russ Housley
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Joe Touch
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Janet P Gunn
• RE: [karp] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08
  • From: Black, David
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: David Morris
• RE: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08
  • From: Black, David
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Carlos M. Martinez
• Re: Radical Solution for remote participants
  • From: Andy Bierman
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Arturo Servin
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Turchanyi Geza
• RE: [karp] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08
  • From: Uma Chunduri
• Re: Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Graham Klyne
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Radical Solution for remote participants
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Marc Petit-Huguenin
• Re: Radical Solution for remote participants
  • From: Janet P Gunn
• Re: Radical Solution for remote participants
  • From: Janet P Gunn
• Re: Charging remote participants
  • From: Janet P Gunn
• Re: Radical Solution for remote participants
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Charging remote participants
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: Radical Solution for remote participants
  • From: Arturo Servin
• Re: Radical Solution for remote participants
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: Radical Solution for remote participants
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Radical Solution for remote participants
  • From: Joel M. Halpern
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Yaron Sheffer
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Martin Sustrik
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Martin Sustrik
• Re: Radical Solution for remote participants
  • From: Mark Nottingham
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Wesley Eddy
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Yaron Sheffer
• Re: CBOR and a tag for "critical"
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: CBOR and a tag for "critical"
  • From: Yaron Sheffer
• Re: CBOR and a tag for "critical"
  • From: Paul Hoffman
• Re: CBOR and a tag for "critical"
  • From: Yaron Sheffer
• Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status
  • From: Joe Touch
• Re: [karp] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08
  • From: Stephen Kent
• CBOR and a tag for "critical"
  • From: Paul Hoffman
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Yaron Sheffer
• Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database"
  • From: SM
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-model-07.txt> (A Model for Reputation Reporting) to Informational RFC
  • From: SM
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-media-type-10.txt> (A Media Type for Reputation Interchange) to Proposed Standard
  • From: SM
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-email-identifiers-08.txt> (A Reputation Response Set for Email Identifiers) to Proposed Standard
  • From: SM
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: SM
• Re: Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Graham Klyne
• Re: Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Graham Klyne
• Re: Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Harald Alvestrand
• Re: Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Peter Saint-Andre
• Re: Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Harald Alvestrand
• Re: Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Hadriel Kaplan
• Re: Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Harald Alvestrand
• Re: [apps-discuss] Gen-ART review of draft-bormann-cbor-04
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: [apps-discuss] Gen-ART review of draft-bormann-cbor-04
  • From: Carsten Bormann
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Phillip Hallam-Baker
• [no subject]
  • From: Unknown
• Re: [karp] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08
  • From: Sam Hartman
• Re: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08
  • From: Sam Hartman
• Re: Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Harald Alvestrand
• Re: Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Harald Alvestrand
• Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database"
  • From: IAB Chair
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Andy Bierman
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Yaron Sheffer
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Andy Bierman
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Carsten Bormann
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Randy Bush
• Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFCPublisher
  • From: t.p.
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Yaron Sheffer
• cbor-05 (was: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard)
  • From: Carsten Bormann
• re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Randy Presuhn
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Paul Hoffman
• RE: RFC 6980 on Security Implications of IPv6 Fragmentation with IPv6 Neighbor Discovery
  • From: Stephen Nadas
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Joe Hildebrand
• re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Yaron Sheffer