Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Ted Lemon <mellon@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
From: Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 17:49:12 -0700
Cc: IETF <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <E74259CB-2D60-4259-89BC-FC361D5CE238@fugue.com>
References: <09b0ed8b-c47a-83c3-9174-cce990bdb145@rfc-editor.org> <00c301d32e41$e948f160$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <15e8698a857.c32afce7287357.8469431812243660972@ovsienko.info> <55215BEF-7520-4425-98F6-6BE1678F2C57@tzi.org> <15e874e49f1.c1362fb757242.2533006499702663721@ovsienko.info> <20170916153239.thscwu7ljiz37xcn@sources.org> <4815e600-7ec2-86a5-85ac-7ac508185881@gmx.de> <C1FD5021-9193-40FF-846D-B948407A6E41@tzi.org> <1d4033e5-48d2-b62c-d0a2-476ba7541034@nostrum.com> <c53bcaeb-f660-538e-f1f9-3aa213a77c3c@gmx.de> <68C17F98-15AB-4AA5-BB4B-B46D53C51585@fugue.com> <83c37ab2-51f7-9a94-2b86-2b4fbe1cd1d6@nostrum.com> <39EBEA6F-69B7-4B9A-9A72-761766628E1D@fugue.com> <019e429c-5332-b0c7-b895-08e64bae17cd@gmx.de> <A5DCDBE7-ED9B-4393-BAB2-F139C4139AA7@fugue.com> <8ccf8c64-a77a-3213-27ed-96691e77f827@gmx.de> <63813DDD-E2F2-43A6-A22C-CE55E6B9ED70@fugue.com> <689ea779-5a1a-e1b6-c7b1-307b5b3a0c52@gmx.de> <1682DE05-95A2-488F-9875-8EE5FB8C9943@fugue.com> <c76510f0-bf03-1393-9b35-082439cf466b@nostrum.com> <CA+9kkMDRfr4Vge5VGArdhq2wEioa4BizdGLOvjObBtn3XZEuhg@mail.gmail.com> <E74259CB-2D60-4259-89BC-FC361D5CE238@fugue.com>

> On Sep 18, 2017, at 3:19 PM, Ted Lemon <mellon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Well, presumably we are disabling FTP downloads since they aren't authenticatable,

*Nobody* on the planet has read, let alone implemented, RFC 4217?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Ted Lemon

References:
- RFC Series publishes first RFC with non-ASCII characters
  - From: Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)
- Re: RFC Series publishes first RFC with non-ASCII characters
  - From: tom p.
- Re: RFC Series publishes first RFC with non-ASCII characters
  - From: Denis Ovsienko
- Re: RFC Series publishes first RFC with non-ASCII characters
  - From: Carsten Bormann
- Re: Re: RFC Series publishes first RFC with non-ASCII characters
  - From: Denis Ovsienko
- Re: RFC Series publishes first RFC with non-ASCII characters
  - From: Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: RFC Series publishes first RFC with non-ASCII characters
  - From: Julian Reschke
- Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Carsten Bormann
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Adam Roach
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Julian Reschke
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Ted Lemon
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Adam Roach
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Ted Lemon
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Julian Reschke
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Ted Lemon
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Julian Reschke
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Ted Lemon
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Julian Reschke
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Ted Lemon
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Adam Roach
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Ted Hardie
- Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
  - From: Ted Lemon

Prev by Date: Re: [Doh] WG Review: DNS Over HTTPS (doh)
Next by Date: Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
Previous by thread: Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
Next by thread: Re: Should the IETF be condoning, even promoting, BOM pollution?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [IETF Annoucements] [IETF] [IP Storage] [Yosemite News] [Linux SCTP] [Linux Newbies] [Fedora Users]