IETF Discussion

• Thread Index

• Re: on the value of "running code" (was Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Andy Bierman
• Re: on the value of "running code" (was Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Lixia Zhang
• Re: Beggars _can_ be choosers?
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Beggars _can_ be choosers?
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Frank Kastenholz
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Cyrus Daboo
• Re: Beggars _can_ be choosers?
  • From: Harald Alvestrand
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Stephane Bortzmeyer
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Stephane Bortzmeyer
• RE: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Noel Chiappa
• RE: Charging I-Ds
  • From: michael.dillon
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: Beggars _can_ be choosers?
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: DHCP failures (was RE: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Bill Fenner
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Last Call: draft-drage-sipping-service-identification (A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension for the Identification of Services) to Informational RFC
  • From: Eric Burger
• Re: on the value of "running code" (was Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: David Conrad
• Re: Beggars _can_ be choosers?
  • From: David W. Hankins
• Re: Beggars _can_ be choosers?
  • From: John C Klensin
• RE: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Richard Shockey
• Re: Beggars _can_ be choosers?
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: Beggars _can_ be choosers?
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: DHCP failures (was RE: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: Beggars _can_ be choosers?
  • From: Joel Jaeggli
• RE: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Bob Braden
• Re: on the value of "running code" (was Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Eric Burger
• Re: Beggars _can_ be choosers?
  • From: David W. Hankins
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: Beggars _can_ be choosers?
  • From: Ralph Droms
• Re: Beggars _can_ be choosers?
  • From: Joel Jaeggli
• Beggars _can_ be choosers?
  • From: David W. Hankins
• RE: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Richard Shockey
• Re: Funding (was Re: Charging I-Ds)
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Eric Rosen
• Re: Funding (was Re: Charging I-Ds)
  • From: Arnt Gulbrandsen
• Re: Funding (was Re: Charging I-Ds)
  • From: Suresh Krishnan
• RE: Funding (was Re: Charging I-Ds)
  • From: Steve Silverman
• URN administration in draft-drage-sipping-service-identification-01
  • From: Atle Monrad (GR/ETO)
• Re: on the value of "running code" (was Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Alexey Melnikov
• Re: on the value of "running code" (was Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Douglas Otis
• RE: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Funding (was Re: Charging I-Ds)
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: On firewall traversal vs. bypass
  • From: Aki Niemi
• Re: on the value of "running code" (was Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: on the value of "running code" (was Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: DHCP failures (was RE: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Funding (was Re: Charging I-Ds)
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• RE: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Peter Sherbin
• Re: DHCP failures (was RE: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Bob Hinden
• Re: DHCP failures (was RE: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: DHCP failures (was RE: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: DHCP failures (was RE: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Marc Manthey
• DHCP failures (was RE: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Tony Hain
• RE: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• on the value of "running code" (was Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: IETF Secretariat Services RFP Bidders
  • From: Ray Pelletier
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Peter Saint-Andre
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Alexey Melnikov
• Re: IETF Secretariat Services RFP Bidders
  • From: Pete Resnick
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Alexey Melnikov
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Keith Moore
• Funding (was Re: Charging I-Ds)
  • From: Suresh Krishnan
• RE: On firewall traversal vs. bypass
  • From: Dan Wing
• Re: [OT] Internet / DNS Timeline (The History of the Internet DNS)
  • From: Ofer Inbar
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Peter Saint-Andre
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Tim Chown
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Adrian Farrel
• RE: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Eric Gray (LO/EUS)
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Melinda Shore
• Re: IPv6: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Peter Saint-Andre
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Thierry Ernst
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Ned Freed
• RE: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Keith Moore
• RE: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: IPv6: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Joe Abley
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Thierry Ernst
• Re: IPv6: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Joe Abley
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Marshall Eubanks
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Tim Chown
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Simon Josefsson
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Melinda Shore
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Stephane Bortzmeyer
• IETF Secretariat Services RFP Bidders
  • From: IETF Administrative Director
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Charging I-Ds
  • From: Julian Reschke
• Charging I-Ds
  • From: Thierry Ernst
• Re: On firewall traversal vs. bypass
  • From: Melinda Shore
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Arnt Gulbrandsen
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Adrian Farrel
• Re: about RSVP : Admin hello disable.
  • From: Adrian Farrel
• On firewall traversal vs. bypass
  • From: Aki Niemi
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Julian Reschke
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Jeffrey Altman
• about RSVP : Admin hello disable.
  • From: shivakumar
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Andy Bierman
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Ken Raeburn
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Michael Thomas
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Edward Lewis
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Peter Saint-Andre
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Matt Pounsett
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Lyndon Nerenberg
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Fred Baker
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Andy Bierman
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Carsten Bormann
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Bill Manning
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Bill Manning
• Re: IPv6: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Spencer Dawkins
• Re: IPv6: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Tony Li
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Doug Ewell
• Re: IPv6: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Joel Jaeggli
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Ole Jacobsen
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Adrian Farrel
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
• Re: IPv6: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Marc Manthey
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Arnt Gulbrandsen
• IPv6: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Peter Dambier
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Stewart Bryant
• Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: Harald Alvestrand
• Re: IETF 69 ical Agent Generator bug?
  • From: Henrik Levkowetz
• Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
  • From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
• Re: e2e
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx
  • From: Thomas Narten
• Re: e2e
  • From: Steven M. Bellovin
• Re: RFC Announcement Format
  • From: Philip Matthews
• Re: e2e
  • From: Joel Jaeggli
• RE: e2e
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: e2e
  • From: Noel Chiappa
• Re: e2e
  • From: Lixia Zhang
• Re: e2e
  • From: Scott Brim
• e2e
  • From: John Kristoff
• RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-and-rtcp-mux-05.txt
  • From: Black_David
• Re: ICE deployment data before LC for RFC
  • From: Henry Sinnreich
• Transport Directorate review of draft-ietf-ipfix-implementation-guidelines-06.txt
  • From: Black_David
• RE: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-sipping-v6-transition-05
  • From: Tobias Gondrom
• Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-sipping-v6-transition-05
  • From: Vijay K. Gurbani
• RE: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-sipping-v6-transition-05
  • From: Tobias Gondrom
• RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-and-rtcp-mux-05.txt
  • From: Black_David
• Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-and-rtcp-mux-05.txt
  • From: Black_David
• Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-sipping-v6-transition-05
  • From: Vijay K. Gurbani
• IETF 69 ical Agent Generator bug?
  • From: Yangwoo Ko
• RFC Announcement Format
  • From: Bill McQuillan
• Re: Last Call comment: draft-rosenberg-sip-app-media-tag-01.txt
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: Last Call comment: draft-rosenberg-sip-app-media-tag-01.txt
  • From: Ted Hardie
• Re: Last Call comment: draft-rosenberg-sip-app-media-tag-01.txt
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Last Call comment: draft-rosenberg-sip-app-media-tag-01.txt
  • From: Ted Hardie
• Re: Requirements for Open IESG Positions
  • From: Soininen Jonne (NSN FI/Espoo)
• RE: Requirements for Open IESG Positions
  • From: Narayanan, Vidya
• Re: Requirements for Open IESG Positions
  • From: Jari Arkko
• Re: Requirements for Open IESG Positions
  • From: Sam Hartman
• Re: IETF Streaming
  • From: Scott O. Bradner
• Re: Requirements for Open IESG Positions
  • From: Jari Arkko
• Re: IETF Streaming
  • From: Henrik Levkowetz
• Re: IETF Streaming
  • From: Jeffrey Altman
• RE: Requirements for Open IESG Positions
  • From: Russ Housley
• IAOC office hours
  • From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist
• RE: Requirements for Open IESG Positions
  • From: Narayanan, Vidya
• Re: IETF Streaming
  • From: Marc Manthey
• Re: IETF Streaming
  • From: Jeffrey Altman
• Re: Requirements for Open IESG Positions
  • From: Russ Housley
• Re: Requirements for Open IESG Positions
  • From: Sam Hartman
• Re: Requirements for Open IESG Positions
  • From: Soininen Jonne (NSN FI/Espoo)
• Re: Requirements for Open IESG Positions
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Requirements for Open IESG Positions
  • From: Soininen Jonne (NSN FI/Espoo)
• Re: WG Action: RECHARTER: Kerberos (krb-wg)
  • From: Sam Hartman
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Sam Hartman
• HP nc4010 power supply??
  • From: Robert (IETF) Moskowitz
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: Last Call: draft-duerst-archived-at (The Archived-At Message Header Field) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Stephane Bortzmeyer
• Re: take the train in Chicago
  • From: Russ Housley
• IETF Streaming
  • From: Joel Jaeggli
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Bob Braden
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Kurt Zeilenga
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Philip Matthews
• "Self-Address Fixing Evolution (SAFE) -- STUN Controlled Middlebox Traversal" Bar-BoF - SUNDAY, July 22, 2007 8pm
  • From: Hannes Tschofenig
• Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx
  • From: Thomas Narten
• Re: Audio Streaming - IETF69 Chicago Illinois USA July 22nd-27th
  • From: Joel Jaeggli
• Re: Audio Streaming - IETF69 Chicago Illinois USA July 22nd-27th
  • From: Lucy Lynch
• Re: Audio Streaming - IETF69 Chicago Illinois USA July 22nd-27th
  • From: Philip Matthews
• Re: [OT] Internet / DNS Timeline (The History of the Internet DNS)
  • From: Joe Baptista
• Re: [OT] Internet / DNS Timeline (The History of the Internet DNS)
  • From: Roy Arends
• [OT] Internet / DNS Timeline (The History of the Internet DNS)
  • From: Joe Baptista
• RE: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: michael.dillon
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• RE: Peers, servers and consumers (was RE: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition)
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Peers, servers and consumers (was RE: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition)
  • From: Ted Hardie
• RE: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-and-rtcp-mux-05.txt
  • From: Colin Perkins
• Authority-to-Individuals Emergency Services Bar-BOF: Update
  • From: Hannes Tschofenig
• Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-and-rtcp-mux-05.txt
  • From: Colin Perkins
• Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-and-rtcp-mux-05.txt
  • From: Colin Perkins
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• RE: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: michael.dillon
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: secdir review of draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-requirements-04
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• [OT] DNS test of validity of a claim ROOT fracture
  • From: Joe Baptista
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• secdir review of draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-requirements-04
  • From: David Harrington
• Re: take the train in Chicago
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Ted Hardie
• Re: take the train in Chicago
  • From: sml
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Melinda Shore
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Joel Jaeggli
• Re: take the train in Chicago
  • From: Janet P Gunn
• Re: take the train in Chicago
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: take the train in Chicago
  • From: Tim Chown
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Dave Cridland
• Re: [Sip] Last Call: draft-ietf-sip-answermode (Requesting Answering Modes for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dean Willis
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Melinda Shore
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Melinda Shore
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Hannes Tschofenig
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: michael.dillon
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Hannes Tschofenig
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• IPv6 demystified
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Audio Streaming - IETF69 Chicago Illinois USA July 22nd-27th
  • From: Joel Jaeggli
• Re: take the train in Chicago
  • From: Marshall Eubanks
• Re: take the train in Chicago
  • From: John Levine
• take the train in Chicago
  • From: Andy Bierman
• Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Joel Jaeggli
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Noel Chiappa
• Re: Audio streaming at IETF 69
  • From: Joel Jaeggli
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Stephen Sprunk
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Russ Housley
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Russ Housley
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Hannes Tschofenig
• Audio streaming at IETF 69
  • From: Julian Reschke
• Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• RE: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Tony Hain
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Autoreply
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Melinda Shore
• RE: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: michael.dillon
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Keith Moore
• The myth of NAT traversal, was: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Hannes Tschofenig
• Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Hannes Tschofenig
• Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• RE: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Julian Reschke
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Russ Housley
• RE: Updating the rules?
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Stephen Sprunk
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Julian Reschke
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Russ Housley
• Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: shogunx
• RE: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• IPv4 to IPv6 transition
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: Autoreply
  • From: Ken Raeburn
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Stephen Sprunk
• Re: Autoreply
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Autoreply
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: Autoreply
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Autoreply
  • From: John C Klensin
• Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx
  • From: Thomas Narten
• Re: Autoreply
  • From: Ken Raeburn
• Re: Autoreply
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: Autoreply
  • From: Ken Raeburn
• Re: Autoreply
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Working Group Last Call: syslog-sign-22
  • From: David Harrington
• Re: Autoreply: Last Call: draft-duerst-archived-at (The Archived-At Message Header Field) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Ken Raeburn
• Re: Autoreply: Last Call: draft-duerst-archived-at (The Archived-At Message Header Field) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: Autoreply: Last Call: draft-duerst-archived-at (The Archived-At Message Header Field) to Proposed Standard
  • From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
• Autoreply: Last Call: draft-duerst-archived-at (The Archived-At Message Header Field) to Proposed Standard
  • From: jburguet
• Autoreply: Last Call: draft-ietf-lemonade-reconnect-client (IMAP4 Extensions for Quick Mailbox Resynchronization) to Proposed Standard
  • From: jburguet
• RE: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Annoying auto-reply messages
  • From: Ned Freed
• Re: Annoying auto-reply messages
  • From: Suresh Krishnan
• Re: Annoying auto-reply messages
  • From: John C Klensin
• IAOC Scribes
  • From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist
• Re: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Douglas Otis
• [Sip] Last Call: draft-ietf-sip-answermode (Requesting AnsweringModes for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Steve Langstaff
• Re: Annoying auto-reply messages
  • From: Eric Burger
• Re: Last Call: draft-carlberg-trip-attribute-rp (TRIP Attribute for Resource Priority) to Proposed Standard
  • From: ken carlberg
• Re: Annoying auto-reply messages
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Masataka Ohta
• Re: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Eliot Lear
• Re: PKI is weakly secure
  • From: Masataka Ohta
• Re: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Autoreply: Last Call: draft-ietf-sip-answermode (Requesting Answering Modes for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: jburguet
• Re: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Stephen Kent
• Re: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Douglas Otis
• RE: Updating the rules?
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: Application knowledge of transport characteristics (was: Re:Domain Centric Administration)
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Annoying auto-reply messages
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: Annoying auto-reply messages
  • From: Arnt Gulbrandsen
• Re: Last Call: draft-carlberg-trip-attribute-rp (TRIP Attribute for Resource Priority) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Ted Hardie
• RE: PKI is weakly secure
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Annoying auto-reply messages
  • From: Ole Jacobsen
• Autoreply: Last Call: draft-hunt-avt-rtcpxnq (BT's eXtended Network Quality RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR XNQ)) to Informational RFC
  • From: jburguet
• Autoreply: Last Call: draft-carlberg-trip-attribute-rp (TRIP Attribute for Resource Priority) to Proposed Standard
  • From: jburguet
• Re: PKI is weakly secure
  • From: Peter Saint-Andre
• Re: PKI is weakly secure
  • From: Stephen Kent
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Robert Sayre
• Re: PKI is weakly secure
  • From: Masataka Ohta
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Peter Saint-Andre
• Re: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Stephen Kent
• Re: Application knowledge of transport characteristics (was: Re: Domain Centric Administration)
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Autoreply: Last Call: draft-rosenberg-sip-app-media-tag (A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Media Feature Tag for MIME Application Sub-Types) to Proposed Standard
  • From: jburguet
• Autoreply: Last Call: draft-drage-sipping-service-identification (A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension for the Identification of Services) to Informational RFC
  • From: jburguet
• Re: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: Application knowledge of transport characteristics (was: Re: Domain Centric Administration)
  • From: Stephane Bortzmeyer
• Re: Application knowledge of transport characteristics (was: Re: Domain Centric Administration)
  • From: Michael Tuexen
• Re: Application knowledge of transport characteristics (was: Re: Domain Centric Administration)
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: Application knowledge of transport characteristics (was: Re: Domain Centric Administration)
  • From: Lars Eggert
• Re: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Eliot Lear
• Re: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Masataka Ohta
• Re: PKI is weakly secure
  • From: Sam Hartman
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Sam Hartman
• IETF Secretariat Services RFP Qs & As
  • From: Ray Pelletier
• Re: A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Stephen Sprunk
• Re: A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Mark Andrews
• Re: A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Michael Thomas
• Re: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Masataka Ohta
• Re: PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Eliot Lear
• PKI is weakly secure (was Re: Updating the rules?)
  • From: Masataka Ohta
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Last Call: draft-wilde-text-fragment (URI Fragment Identifiers for the text/plain Media Type) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Martin Duerst
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Robert Sayre
• Re: A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: draft-williams-on-channel-binding: IANA rules too complicated
  • From: Nicolas Williams
• Re: A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Updating the rules?
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: draft-williams-on-channel-binding: IANA rules too complicated
  • From: Kurt Zeilenga
• A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Terry Gray
• Re: draft-williams-on-channel-binding: IANA rules too complicated
  • From: Jeffrey Altman
• Re: draft-williams-on-channel-binding: IANA rules too complicated
  • From: Sam Hartman
• Re: draft-williams-on-channel-binding: IANA rules too complicated
  • From: Simon Josefsson
• Re: draft-williams-on-channel-binding: IANA rules too complicated
  • From: Jeffrey Altman
• Draft ION about our rules in practice
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Autoreply: Last Call: draft-ietf-sip-acr-code (Rejecting Anonymous Requests in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: jburguet
• Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: draft-williams-on-channel-binding: IANA rules too complicated
  • From: Alexey Melnikov
• Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: john . loughney
• Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• RE: Putting technology on the table [Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt]
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: Nomcom 2007-8: Randomness Sources for review
  • From: Eastlake III Donald-LDE008
• draft-williams-on-channel-binding: IANA rules too complicated
  • From: Sam Hartman
• Re: Application knowledge of transport characteristics
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: Application knowledge of transport characteristics (was: Re: Domain Centric Administration)
  • From: Tom.Petch
• Re: tsv-dir review of draft-ietf-xcon-bfcp-connection-04
  • From: Cullen Jennings
• Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: Nomcom 2007-8: Randomness Sources for review
  • From: Lakshminath Dondeti
• Re: Nomcom 2007-8: Randomness Sources for review
  • From: Suresh Krishnan
• RE: tsv-dir review of draft-ietf-xcon-bfcp-connection-04
  • From: Black_David
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Marc Blanchet
• Re: tsv-dir review of draft-ietf-xcon-bfcp-connection-04
  • From: Gonzalo Camarillo
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Tony Li
• Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Tony Li
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Tony Li
• Consideration of draft-lior-radius-attribute-type-extension-02.txt
  • From: Bernard Aboba
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Tony Li
• Updating the rules?
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Putting technology on the table [Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt]
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Nomcom 2007-8: Randomness Sources for review
  • From: Lakshminath Dondeti
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• RE: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Autoreply: Last Call: draft-ietf-ipfix-implementation-guidelines (IPFIX Implementation Guidelines) to Informational RFC
  • From: jburguet
• Re: Nomcom 2007-8: Randomness Sources for review
  • From: Lakshminath Dondeti
• Re: Nomcom 2007-8: Randomness Sources for review
  • From: Ole Jacobsen
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Nomcom 2007-8: Randomness Sources for review
  • From: Lakshminath Dondeti
• Re: Nomcom 2007-8: Randomness Sources for review
  • From: Suresh Krishnan
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: michael.dillon
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Joe Baptista
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Joe Baptista
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: michael.dillon
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: SM
• RE: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Michel Py
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Stephen Sprunk
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Douglas Otis
• RE: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Mailman request spam exploit
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Clint Chaplin
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• RE: Domain Centric Administration
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Christian Huitema
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Clint Chaplin
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Application knowledge of transport characteristics (was: Re: Domain Centric Administration)
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Joel Jaeggli
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Noel Chiappa
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Marshall Eubanks
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Joel Jaeggli
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Noel Chiappa
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Arnt Gulbrandsen
• Autoreply: Last Call: draft-ietf-avt-rtp-and-rtcp-mux (Multiplexing RTP Data and Control Packets on a Single Port) to Proposed Standard
  • From: jburguet
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Melinda Shore
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: michael.dillon
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Thierry Ernst
• Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: SM
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Mark Andrews
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: David Conrad
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Ned Freed
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Mark Andrews
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: David Morris
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Mark Andrews
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: Should not URIs be resources and not actions
  • From: Masataka Ohta
• RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: Should not URIs be resources and not actions
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Keith Moore
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Should not URIs be resources and not actions
  • From: Eric Burger
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Douglas Otis
• RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Noel Chiappa
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Jeroen Massar
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Elwyn Davies
• RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Jeffrey Hutzelman
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jeffrey Hutzelman
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Melinda Shore
• RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Christian Huitema
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Melinda Shore
• RE: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Domain Centric Administration, RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Autoreply: Last Call: draft-ietf-sip-gruu (Obtaining and Using Globally Routable User Agent (UA) URIs (GRUU) in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)) to Proposed Standard
  • From: jburguet
• Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Noel Chiappa
• secdir review of draft-ietf-dhc-server-override-04.txt
  • From: Stephen Hanna
• Re: IPv6 transition technologies
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: IPv6 transition technologies
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: IPv6 transition technologies
  • From: Paul Hoffman
• Re: IPv6 transition technologies
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Philip Matthews
• Re: IPv6 transition technologies
  • From: Paul Hoffman
• IPv6 transition technologies
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jeroen Massar
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Paul Hoffman
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Keith Moore
• RE: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Michel Py
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Fred Baker
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Noel Chiappa
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Bob Hinden
• What about the SMS URI?
  • From: Daniel Aleksandersen
• Should not URIs be resources and not actions
  • From: Daniel Aleksandersen
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-requirements (Requirements for a DKIM Signing Practices Protocol) to Informational RFC
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Autoreply: Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-srp (Using SRP for TLS Authentication) to Informational RFC
  • From: jburguet
• Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx
  • From: Thomas Narten
• Last Call: draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-requirements (Requirements for a DKIM Signing Practices Protocol) to Informational RFC
  • From: Douglas Otis
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Ralph Droms
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Michael Thomas
• Re: IESG workload problem (Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? )
  • From: Joe Touch
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• IESG workload problem (Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? )
  • From: Harald Alvestrand
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Michael Thomas
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Joe Touch
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Joe Touch
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Keith Moore
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Joe Touch
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Has anyone looked at the DISCUSS Criteria document lately? (Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago))
  • From: Spencer Dawkins
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Randall Gellens
• Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
  • From: Jim Martin
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Joe Touch
• RE: Ietf Digest, Vol 38, Issue 40... Content of IETF digest.
  • From: Mohammed Shahnawaz
• Re: Last Call: draft-hutzler-spamops (Email Submission: Access and Accountability) to BCP
  • From: Chris Newman
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: John C Klensin
• Udaya V Kumar is out of the office.
  • From: Udaya V Kumar
• Autoreply: Last Call: draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-requirements (Requirements for a DKIM Signing Practices Protocol) to Informational RFC
  • From: jburguet
• Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx
  • From: Thomas Narten
• Re: Last Call: draft-hutzler-spamops (Email Submission: Access and Accountability) to BCP
  • From: Tony Finch
• Re: Last Call: draft-hutzler-spamops (Email Submission: Access and Accountability) to BCP
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Last Call: draft-hutzler-spamops (Email Submission: Access and Accountability) to BCP
  • From: Tony Finch
• Re: Last Call: draft-hutzler-spamops (Email Submission: Access and Accountability) to BCP
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Last Call: draft-hutzler-spamops (Email Submission: Access and Accountability) to BCP
  • From: Dave Crocker
• Re: Last Call: draft-hutzler-spamops (Email Submission: Access and Accountability) to BCP
  • From: Tony Finch
• Re: Last Call: draft-hutzler-spamops (Email Submission: Access and Accountability) to BCP
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Withdrawing sponsorship of draft-housley-tls-authz-extns
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: ABNF third-party rights as code (BCP78)
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-lemonade-rfc2192bis (IMAP URL Scheme) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Tony Finch
• ABNF third-party rights as code (BCP78)
  • From: Dave Cridland
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-split
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Reforming the BOF Process (was Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Reforming the BOF Process (was Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: Reforming the BOF Process (was Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Clint Chaplin
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Cullen Jennings
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-lemonade-rfc2192bis (IMAP URL Scheme) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Joel M. Halpern
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-lemonade-rfc2192bis (IMAP URL Scheme) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Ted Hardie
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-lemonade-rfc2192bis (IMAP URL Scheme) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Joel M. Halpern
• Re: On Experts [Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)]
  • From: Michael Thomas
• Re: Reforming the BOF Process (was Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Henning Schulzrinne
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-lemonade-rfc2192bis (IMAP URL Scheme) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Paul Hoffman
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-lemonade-rfc2192bis (IMAP URL Scheme) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Ted Hardie
• RE: Reforming the BOF Process (was Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Bernard Aboba
• RE: Reforming the BOF Process (was Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Bernard Aboba
• RE: Reforming the BOF Process (was Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Bernard Aboba
• RE: tsv-dir review of draft-ietf-xcon-bfcp-connection-04
  • From: Black_David
• Re: tsv-dir review of draft-ietf-xcon-bfcp-connection-04
  • From: Gonzalo Camarillo
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-lemonade-rfc2192bis (IMAP URL Scheme) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Cridland
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Joel M. Halpern
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-lemonade-rfc2192bis (IMAP URL Scheme) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Simon Josefsson
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-lemonade-rfc2192bis (IMAP URL Scheme) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Cridland
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-lemonade-rfc2192bis (IMAP URL Scheme) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Simon Josefsson
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-lemonade-rfc2192bis (IMAP URL Scheme) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Dave Cridland
• Re: Role of IANA in approving assignments
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• On Experts [Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)]
  • From: Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-lemonade-rfc2192bis (IMAP URL Scheme) to Proposed Standard
  • From: Simon Josefsson
• Re: Reforming the BOF Process (was Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Lakshminath Dondeti
• RE: Reforming the BOF Process (was Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
• Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: Lakshminath Dondeti
• IANA considerations concerns -- specific cases?
  • From: Jari Arkko
• Re: Reforming the BOF Process (was Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)
  • From: John C Klensin
• Re: [XCON] Re: tsv-dir review of draft-ietf-xcon-bfcp-connection-04
  • From: Eric Rescorla
• RE: [XCON] Re: tsv-dir review of draft-ietf-xcon-bfcp-connection-04
  • From: Brian Rosen
• Re: Role of IANA in approving assignments
  • From: Harald Alvestrand
• RE: Reforming the BOF Process (was Declining the ifare bof forChicago)
  • From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
• draft-ietf-syslog-protocol-21.txt: section 3 contains new text to address ietf last call comments
  • From: Sam Hartman
• Re: Type I vs. Type II errors
  • From: Keith Moore