IETF Discussion

• Date Index

• 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, (continued)
  • 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, 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, 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, John R 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, 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, John R 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, 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, Jelte Jansen
          • 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), John C Klensin
  • SPF TYPE support, Hector Santos
    • Re: SPF TYPE support, Pete Resnick
    • Re: SPF TYPE support, S Moonesamy
      • Re: SPF TYPE support, Måns Nilsson
        • Re: SPF TYPE support, Dave Crocker
      • Re: [spfbis] SPF TYPE support, Hector Santos
        • Re: [spfbis] SPF TYPE support, S Moonesamy
    • Re: [spfbis] SPF TYPE support, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, Dotzero
  • 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, Pete Resnick
• Re: [Dime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dime-realm-based-redirect-11.txt> (Realm-Based Redirection In Diameter) to Proposed Standard, Stefan Winter
  • RE: [Dime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dime-realm-based-redirect-11.txt> (Realm-Based Redirection In Diameter) to Proposed Standard, lionel.morand
    • Re: [Dime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dime-realm-based-redirect-11.txt> (Realm-Based Redirection In Diameter) to Proposed Standard, Stefan Winter
      • RE: [Dime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dime-realm-based-redirect-11.txt> (Realm-Based Redirection In Diameter) to Proposed Standard, lionel.morand
        • Re: [Dime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dime-realm-based-redirect-11.txt> (Realm-Based Redirection In Diameter) to Proposed Standard, Stefan Winter
          • RE: [Dime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dime-realm-based-redirect-11.txt> (Realm-Based Redirection In Diameter) to Proposed Standard, lionel.morand
• Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-10, Black, David
  • Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-10, Eric McMurry
    • RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-10, Black, David
      • Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-10, Ben Campbell
• IAOC Chair, The IAOC
• Anyone having trouble submitting I-Ds?, Benjamin Kaduk
  • Re: Anyone having trouble submitting I-Ds?, Benjamin Kaduk
    • Re: Anyone having trouble submitting I-Ds?, Phillip Hallam-Baker
      • Re: Anyone having trouble submitting I-Ds?, John Levine
        • Re: Anyone having trouble submitting I-Ds?, Robert Sparks
• Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-karp-ops-model-07, Ben Campbell
  • Message not available
    • Re: Fwd: Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-karp-ops-model-07, Sam Hartman
      • Re: Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-karp-ops-model-07, Ben Campbell
        • Re: Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-karp-ops-model-07, Sam Hartman
• Re: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08, Sam Hartman
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08, Sam Hartman
    • RE: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08, Black, David
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-model-07.txt> (A Model for Reputation Reporting) to Informational RFC, SM
  • Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-model-07.txt> (A Model for Reputation Reporting) to Informational RFC, Murray S. Kucherawy
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-media-type-10.txt> (A Media Type for Reputation Interchange) to Proposed Standard, SM
  • Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-media-type-10.txt> (A Media Type for Reputation Interchange) to Proposed Standard, Murray S. Kucherawy
    • Message not available
      • Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-media-type-10.txt> (A Media Type for Reputation Interchange) to Proposed Standard, SM
        • Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-media-type-10.txt> (A Media Type for Reputation Interchange) to Proposed Standard, Murray S. Kucherawy
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-email-identifiers-08.txt> (A Reputation Response Set for Email Identifiers) to Proposed Standard, SM
  • Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-email-identifiers-08.txt> (A Reputation Response Set for Email Identifiers) to Proposed Standard, Murray S. Kucherawy
• Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard, SM
  • Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard, Murray S. Kucherawy
    • Message not available
      • Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard, SM
        • Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard, Murray S. Kucherawy
          • Message not available
            • Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard, SM
              • Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard, Murray S. Kucherawy
                • Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard, Bob Braden
                  • Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard, John C Klensin
                    • Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09.txt> (A Reputation Query Protocol) to Proposed Standard, Hector Santos
• [no subject], Unknown
• Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database", IAB Chair
  • Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database", SM
    • Re: [IAB] Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database", Russ Housley
    • Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database", John C Klensin
      • Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database", Brian E Carpenter
        • Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database", Phillip Hallam-Baker
          • Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database", Pete Resnick
    • Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database", Pete Resnick
      • Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database", John C Klensin
      • Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database", SM
      • Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database", Tony Hansen
        • Re: Call for Review of draft-rfced-rfcxx00-retired, "List of Internet Official Protocol Standards: Replaced by an Online Database", Pete Resnick
• cbor-05 (was: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt> (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard), Carsten Bormann
  • High-volume benchmark (was Re: [apps-discuss] cbor-05), Pierre Thierry
    • Re: High-volume benchmark (was Re: [apps-discuss] cbor-05), Carsten Bormann
• RE: RFC 6980 on Security Implications of IPv6 Fragmentation with IPv6 Neighbor Discovery, Stephen Nadas
• Last Call: <draft-petithuguenin-behave-turn-uris-05.txt> (Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN) Uniform Resource Identifiers) to Proposed, Graham Klyne
• Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard, 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, S Moonesamy
    • Re: Last Call: <draft-nandakumar-rtcweb-stun-uri-05.txt> (URI Scheme for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Protocol) to Proposed Standard, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, 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, Marc Petit-Huguenin
• Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, IETF Administrative Director
  • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Riccardo Bernardini
    • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Melinda Shore
      • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Ted Lemon
        • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, John Levine
    • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, John Levine
      • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Riccardo Bernardini
      • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Ted Lemon
        • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFCPublisher, t.p.
    • Re: [rfc-i] Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Ray Pelletier
  • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Ray Pelletier
    • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Sandy Ginoza
      • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Stephen Farrell
      • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, David Harrington
    • Message not available
      • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Jeffrey Hutzelman
        • Re: [IAOC] Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Russ Housley
          • Re: [rfc-i] [IAOC] Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Nico Williams
        • Re: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Bert Wijnen (IETF)
    • Re: [IAB] Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Eliot Lear
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Community Input Sought on SOWs for RFC Production Center and RFC Publisher, Adrian Farrel
• NOMS 2014 Call for Papers, Thomas Nadeau
• Data collection for remote participation, Vinayak Hegde
  • Re: Data collection for remote participation, Alejandro Acosta
    • Re: Data collection for remote participation, Vinayak Hegde
      • Re: Data collection for remote participation, Alejandro Acosta
  • Re: Data collection for remote participation, Janet P Gunn
    • Re: Data collection for remote participation, Vinayak Hegde
      • Re: Data collection for remote participation, Janet P Gunn
        • Re: Data collection for remote participation, John Leslie
          • Radical Solution for remote participants, Douglas Otis
            • Re: Radical Solution for remote participants, Dave Cridland
              • Re: Radical Solution for remote participants, John Leslie
                • Re: Radical Solution for remote participants, John C Klensin
                • Re: Radical Solution for remote participants, Hadriel Kaplan
                  • Re: Radical Solution for remote participants, Arturo Servin
                    • Re: Radical Solution for remote participants, Hadriel Kaplan
                  • Re: Radical Solution for remote participants, Janet P Gunn
                    • Re: Radical Solution for remote participants, Janet P Gunn
            • Re: Radical Solution for remote participants, Mark Nottingham
              • Re: Radical Solution for remote participants, Joel M. Halpern
                • Re: Radical Solution for remote participants, John C Klensin
                • Re: Radical Solution for remote participants, Keith Moore
                • Re: Radical Solution for remote participants, Andy Bierman
            • Charging remote participants, Hadriel Kaplan
              • Re: Charging remote participants, Janet P Gunn
                • Re: Charging remote participants, Keith Moore
                  • Re: Charging remote participants, Turchanyi Geza
                  • Re: Charging remote participants, Arturo Servin
                  • Re: Charging remote participants, Hadriel Kaplan
                    • Re: Charging remote participants, Keith Moore
                      • Re: Charging remote participants, Hadriel Kaplan
                        • Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), SM
                          • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), Vinayak Hegde
                          • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), Hadriel Kaplan
                            • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), John C Klensin
                              • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), Hadriel Kaplan
                                • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), John Levine
                            • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), Phillip Hallam-Baker
                            • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), SM
                              • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), John C Klensin
                                • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), SM
                                  • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), John C Klensin
                                    • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), Scott Kitterman
                              • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), Hadriel Kaplan
                                • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), Scott Kitterman
                                  • Re: Academic and open source rate (was: Charging remote participants), Vinayak Hegde
                          • Re: Academic and open source rate, Arturo Servin
                            • Re: Academic and open source rate, SM
                              • Re: Academic and open source rate, Phillip Hallam-Baker
                  • Re: Charging remote participants, Carlos M. Martinez
                    • Re: Charging remote participants, John C Klensin
                      • Re: Charging remote participants, Melinda Shore
                      • Re: Charging remote participants, Hadriel Kaplan
                        • Re: Charging remote participants, Henning Schulzrinne
                          • Re: Charging remote participants, Mark Baugher (mbaugher)
                            • Re: Charging remote participants, Henning Schulzrinne
                              • Re: Charging remote participants, Stephen Farrell
                                • Re: Charging remote participants, Hadriel Kaplan
                        • Re: Charging remote participants, John C Klensin
                          • Re: Charging remote participants, Hadriel Kaplan
                  • Re: Charging remote participants, David Morris
                  • Re: Charging remote participants, Janet P Gunn
              • Re: Charging remote participants, Dave Crocker
                • Re: Charging remote participants, Hadriel Kaplan
              • Re: Charging remote participants, Abdussalam Baryun
                • Re: Charging remote participants, Hadriel Kaplan
                • Re: Charging remote participants, Janet P Gunn
                  • Re: Charging remote participants, Mikael Abrahamsson
                  • Re: Charging remote participants, Dave Aronson
                    • Re: Charging remote participants, Randy Presuhn
                      • Re: Charging remote participants, Janet P Gunn
                    • Re: Charging remote participants, Janet P Gunn
                    • Re: Charging remote participants, Arturo Servin
  • Message not available
    • Re: Data collection for remote participation, S Moonesamy
  • Message not available
    • Re: Charging remote participants, Scott Kitterman
• Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-jabley-dnsext-eui48-eui64-rrtypes-05, Peter Yee
• Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard, Yaron Sheffer
  • Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard, Carsten Bormann
    • Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard, Ted Lemon
        • Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard, John C Klensin
      • Re: Last Call: <draft-bormann-cbor-04.txt (Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)) to Proposed Standard, Eliot Lear
• TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Martin Sustrik
  • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Wesley Eddy
    • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Martin Sustrik
    • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Joe Touch
      • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Wesley Eddy
        • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Martin Sustrik
          • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Joe Touch
            • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Martin Sustrik
              • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Joe Touch
                • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Martin Sustrik
                  • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Joe Touch
                    • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Martin Sustrik
                      • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Joe Touch
                        • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Martin Sustrik
                          • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Joe Touch
                  • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Joe Touch
        • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Bob Braden
          • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Martin Sustrik
      • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Martin Sustrik
        • Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status, Joe Touch
• Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08, Black, David
  • Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08, Jari Arkko
  • Re: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08, Sam Hartman
    • RE: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08, Black, David
      • Re: [karp] IANA policy for draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08, Carter Bullard
  • Re: [karp] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08, Sam Hartman
    • Re: [karp] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08, Stephen Kent
      • RE: [karp] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08, Uma Chunduri
    • RE: [karp] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-karp-crypto-key-table-08, Black, David
• Gen-ART review of draft-eastlake-rfc5342bis-04, Black, David
• Re: [apps-discuss] Gen-ART review of draft-bormann-cbor-04, Carsten Bormann
  • Re: [apps-discuss] Gen-ART review of draft-bormann-cbor-04, Phillip Hallam-Baker
  • Re: [apps-discuss] Gen-ART review of draft-bormann-cbor-04, Tony Finch
    • Re: [apps-discuss] Gen-ART review of draft-bormann-cbor-04, Carsten Bormann
    • Re: [apps-discuss] Gen-ART review of draft-bormann-cbor-04, Paul Hoffman
    • Re: [apps-discuss] Gen-ART review of draft-bormann-cbor-04, Carsten Bormann
      • Re: [apps-discuss] Gen-ART review of draft-bormann-cbor-04, Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Models of building platform standards, Phillip Hallam-Baker
• Re: [TLS] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tls-oob-pubkey-09.txt> (Out-of-Band Public Key Validation for Transport Layer Security (TLS)) to Proposed Standard, Alexey Melnikov
  • Re: [TLS] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tls-oob-pubkey-09.txt> (Out-of-Band Public Key Validation for Transport Layer Security (TLS)) to Proposed Standard, Hannes Tschofenig
• Microphone protocol, Marc Petit-Huguenin
• Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Aaron Yi DING
  • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Joe Abley
    • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Melinda Shore
      • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Keith Moore
      • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Phillip Hallam-Baker
    • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Doug Barton
• Re: [Trustees] The Trust Agreement, Noel Chiappa
  • Re: [Trustees] The Trust Agreement, Brian E Carpenter
• Gen-ART IETF LC review of draft-allen-dispatch-imei-urn-as-instanceid-10, Roni Even
  • RE: Gen-ART IETF LC review of draft-allen-dispatch-imei-urn-as-instanceid-10, Andrew Allen
• Re: procedural question with remote participation, Aaron Yi DING
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Aaron Yi DING
    • Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation, Spencer Dawkins at IETF
  • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Aaron Yi DING
  • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Aaron Yi DING
    • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Michael Richardson
    • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Joe Abley
      • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Eliot Lear
        • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Douglas Otis
      • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Hadriel Kaplan
        • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Joe Abley
  • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Aaron Yi DING
    • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Joe Abley
• Speaking of VAT, John Levine
  • Re: Speaking of VAT, Yoav Nir
    • Re: Speaking of VAT, John R Levine
      • Re: Speaking of VAT, Ray Pelletier
      • Re: Speaking of VAT, t.p.
        • Re: Speaking of VAT, John Levine
  • Re: Speaking of VAT, Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo
  • Re: Speaking of VAT, Carsten Bormann
    • Re: Speaking of VAT, Ray Pelletier
• RPS Accessibility, Paul Aitken
  • Re: RPS Accessibility, spromano
  • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Dan York
    • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Dave Crocker
      • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Michael Richardson
        • Re: RPS Accessibility, Brian Rosen
          • Re: RPS Accessibility, Michael Richardson
          • RE: RPS Accessibility, Robin Uyeshiro
        • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Ted Lemon
      • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Joe Abley
        • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Paul Aitken
      • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Ted Lemon
        • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, John Levine
        • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Randy Bush
          • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, John Levine
            • Faraday cages..., Ted Lemon
              • Re: Faraday cages..., Chris Elliott
                • Re: Faraday cages..., Scott Brim
                  • Re: Faraday cages..., Ted Lemon
                    • Re: Faraday cages..., Joe Abley
                      • Re: Faraday cages..., Scott Kitterman
                        • Re: Faraday cages..., Scott Brim
                        • Re: Faraday cages..., Henning Schulzrinne
                    • Re: Faraday cages..., Ole Jacobsen
                      • Re: Faraday cages..., Ted Lemon
                        • RE: Faraday cages..., Christian Huitema
                          • RE: Faraday cages..., John R Levine
                          • Re: Faraday cages..., Phillip Hallam-Baker
                            • Re: Faraday cages..., Ted Lemon
                              • RE: Faraday cages..., Christian Huitema
                                • Re: Faraday cages..., Phillip Hallam-Baker
                                  • Re: Faraday cages..., Keith Moore
                                    • Re: Faraday cages..., George Michaelson
                                      • Re: Faraday cages..., Phillip Hallam-Baker
                                        • Re: Faraday cages..., George Michaelson
                                        • Re: Faraday cages..., Keith Moore
                                          • Re: Faraday cages..., George Michaelson
                                          • Re: Faraday cages..., Ted Lemon
                                            • Re: Faraday cages..., Keith Moore
                                            • Re: Faraday cages..., Scott Kitterman
                                              • Re: Faraday cages..., Ted Lemon
                                      • Re: Faraday cages..., Mark Andrews
                    • Re: Faraday cages..., Henning Schulzrinne
                  • Re: Faraday cages..., Christopher Morrow
        • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Paul Aitken
          • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Ted Lemon
      • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Ted Lemon
        • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Dave Crocker
        • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Hadriel Kaplan
          • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Ted Lemon
            • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Doug Barton
              • Re: RPS Accessibility, Doug Barton
                • Re: RPS Accessibility, Ted Lemon
              • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Martin Rex
                • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Ted Lemon
            • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Hadriel Kaplan
    • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Henning Schulzrinne
      • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Riccardo Bernardini
        • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Keith Moore
        • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, Hadriel Kaplan
        • Re: [iaoc-rps] RPS Accessibility, manning bill
• Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation, Olle E. Johansson
  • Re: procedural question with remote participation, John C Klensin
    • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Michael Richardson
      • Re: procedural question with remote participation, John C Klensin
        • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Ted Lemon
          • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Brian E Carpenter
            • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Scott Brim
            • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Hadriel Kaplan
            • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Stephen Farrell
              • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Melinda Shore
          • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Keith Moore
            • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Andrew Feren
              • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Keith Moore
                • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Andrew Feren
              • Re: procedural question with remote participation, John C Klensin
                • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Scott Brim
                  • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Dave Crocker
                • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Michael Richardson
                • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Hadriel Kaplan
                  • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Hadriel Kaplan
        • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Hadriel Kaplan
          • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Spencer Dawkins
            • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Hadriel Kaplan
              • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Spencer Dawkins
                • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Scott Brim
            • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Michael Richardson
              • Re: procedural question with remote participation, John C Klensin
                • Re: procedural question with remote participation, James Polk
                • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Stephen Farrell
                  • Re: procedural question with remote participation, John C Klensin
          • Re: procedural question with remote participation, SM
            • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Hadriel Kaplan
        • Re: procedural question with remote participation, John Curran
    • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Hadriel Kaplan
      • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Peter Saint-Andre
        • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Dave Cridland
          • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Stephen Farrell
            • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Hadriel Kaplan
              • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Scott Brim
                • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Yoav Nir
                  • Re: procedural question with remote participation, Scott Brim
• Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Chris Griffiths
  • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Olaf Kolkman
    • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Paul Hoffman
      • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Tobias Gondrom
    • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Chris Griffiths
  • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, t.p.
    • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Chris Griffiths
      • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Brian E Carpenter
        • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Paul Hoffman
          • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Doug Barton
            • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Paul Hoffman
              • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Jorge Contreras
                • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Paul Hoffman
                  • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Doug Barton
                  • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, John Levine
                    • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, John C Klensin
                • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Yoav Nir
                  • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo
  • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, John Levine
  • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, SM
    • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Chris Griffiths
      • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Chris Griffiths
        • RE: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Adrian Farrel
          • Re: Community Feedback: IETF Trust Agreement Issues, Chris Griffiths
• RE: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Adrian Farrel
  • Re: [IETF] RE: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Warren Kumari
  • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Scott Brim
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Aaron Yi DING
• The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Abdussalam Baryun
  • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Heasley
    • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Andy Bierman
    • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Ole Jacobsen (ole)
      • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Roger Jørgensen
        • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Loa Andersson
          • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), John Levine
            • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Melinda Shore
            • Message not available
              • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Tim Chown
            • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), John C Klensin
            • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Jari Arkko
            • Message not available
              • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Abdussalam Baryun
                • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Scott Brim
                • Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx), Hadriel Kaplan
  • Message not available
    • The Friday Report, S Moonesamy
• Thanks, and tools work clarification, Henrik Levkowetz
• Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation), Adam Roach
  • Re: Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation), Scott Brim
    • Re: Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation), Brian E Carpenter
    • Re: Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation), Lou Berger
    • Re: Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation), Olle E. Johansson
      • Re: Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation), Yoav Nir
        • Re: Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation), Ted Lemon
          • Re: Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation), Yoav Nir
            • Re: Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation), Ted Lemon
              • Re: Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation), John C Klensin
  • Re: Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation), Abdussalam Baryun
    • Re: Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation), Scott Brim
    • RE: Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees] procedural question with remote participation), l.wood
• Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Eggert, Lars
  • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Carsten Bormann
    • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Scott Brim
      • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)
        • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Eggert, Lars
          • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)
            • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Andrew Allen
            • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Mary Barnes
              • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Ole Jacobsen
                • RE: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Adrian Farrel
                • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Roberto Peon
                  • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Ted Lemon
                    • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Roberto Peon
                • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Mary Barnes
        • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Ted Lemon
          • AW: Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)
        • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, John Levine
  • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Yoav Nir
    • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Henning Schulzrinne
    • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Martin Thomson
      • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Yoav Nir
        • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Keith Moore
      • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Michael Richardson
        • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Janet P Gunn
          • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Arturo Servin
        • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, John Levine
  • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Russ Housley
    • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Eggert, Lars
      • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Keith Moore
    • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Pat Thaler
  • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, joel jaeggli
  • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Ted Lemon
  • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Livingood, Jason
    • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Jari Arkko
    • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Mary Barnes
      • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Scott Brim
      • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Randall Gellens
        • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, John C Klensin
      • Message not available
        • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Ulrich Herberg
      • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Greg Shepherd
        • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, heasley
      • Message not available
        • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Barry Leiba
  • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, John Levine
    • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Barry Leiba
    • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Ulrich Herberg
      • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Martin Rex
        • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Andy Bierman
        • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, John C Klensin
          • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Keith Moore
            • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Douglas Otis
              • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, John Levine
              • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Ted Lemon
  • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Berlin was awesome, let's come again, Noel Chiappa
• PS Characterization Clarified, Olaf Kolkman
  • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Jari Arkko
    • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Scott O Bradner
      • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, John C Klensin
        • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Olaf Kolkman
          • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Scott Brim
          • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Jari Arkko
            • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Scott O Bradner
    • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Jari Arkko
    • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Barry Leiba
      • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Scott O. Bradner
      • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Ted Lemon
      • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Olaf Kolkman
        • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Barry Leiba
          • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Scott Brim
            • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Randy Bush
            • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Spencer Dawkins
              • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Olaf Kolkman
                • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, S Moonesamy
                  • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Olaf Kolkman
                    • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Scott O Bradner
                • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Barry Leiba
                • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Carsten Bormann
                  • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Olaf Kolkman
                    • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Carsten Bormann
                • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, John C Klensin
                  • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Olaf Kolkman
                    • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Barry Leiba
                      • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, John C Klensin
                        • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Olaf Kolkman
                          • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Dave Cridland
                            • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Alexey Melnikov
                            • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Scott Brim
                            • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, John C Klensin
                          • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, John C Klensin
                    • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, John C Klensin
                      • Why we don't want to actually replace 2026 (was: PS Characterization Clarified), S Moonesamy
                        • Re: Why we don't want to actually replace 2026, Brian E Carpenter
                      • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Olaf Kolkman
                    • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Jari Arkko
                • RE: PS Characterization Clarified, Adrian Farrel
                  • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Olaf Kolkman
  • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Olaf Kolkman
    • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Pete Resnick
      • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Scott O. Bradner
        • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Pete Resnick
          • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, John C Klensin
            • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Olaf Kolkman
              • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Scott O Bradner
              • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, John C Klensin
                • Re: PS Characterization Clarified, Pete Resnick
• Time between meetings, Ulrich Herberg
  • Re: Time between meetings, Arturo Servin
    • Re: Time between meetings, Ulrich Herberg
• About Final Receipt, 赵钦
  • Re: About Final Receipt, Alexa Morris
• The Trust Agreement, Brian E Carpenter
  • Re: The Trust Agreement, John C Klensin
    • Re: [Trustees] The Trust Agreement, Chris Griffiths
  • Re: The Trust Agreement, SM
    • Re: [Trustees] The Trust Agreement, Chris Griffiths
      • Re: [Trustees] The Trust Agreement, SM
  • Re: [Trustees] The Trust Agreement, Chris Griffiths
    • Re: [Trustees] The Trust Agreement, Jorge Contreras
      • Re: [Trustees] The Trust Agreement, Brian E Carpenter
      • Re: [Trustees] The Trust Agreement, John C Klensin
        • Re: [Trustees] The Trust Agreement, Paul Hoffman
    • RE: [Trustees] The Trust Agreement, Adrian Farrel
• ADMIN PLENARY session recording available, Meetecho Team
• 6tsch BoF, Ralph Droms
  • Re: 6tsch BoF, Andy Bierman
    • Re: 6tsch BoF, joel jaeggli
      • Re: 6tsch BoF, Melinda Shore
        • Re: 6tsch BoF, joel jaeggli
    • Re: 6tsch BoF, Ralph Droms
      • Re: 6tsch BoF, Andy Bierman
    • Re: 6tsch BoF, manning bill
      • Re: 6tsch BoF, Joe Abley
      • Re: 6tsch BoF, Andy Bierman
        • Re: 6tsch BoF, Barry Leiba
    • Re: 6tsch BoF, Yoav Nir
      • Re: 6tsch BoF, Scott Brim
      • Re: 6tsch BoF, Andy Bierman
        • Re: 6tsch BoF, Ralph Droms
        • Re: 6tsch BoF, Ted Lemon
          • Message not available
            • Re: 6tsch BoF, SM
              • Re: 6tsch BoF, Ted Lemon
                • Message not available
                  • Re: 6tsch BoF, SM
                    • Re: 6tsch BoF, Ted Lemon
                    • Re: 6tsch BoF, Barry Leiba
                      • Re: 6tsch BoF, Scott Brim
                        • Re: 6tsch BoF, Barry Leiba
                          • RE: 6tsch BoF, l.wood
                        • Re: 6tsch BoF, Randy Bush
        • Message not available
          • Message not available
            • Message not available
              • Message not available
                • Message not available
                  • Protecting the disclosure of the identity (was: Loud humming is subject to cultural bias), SM
        • Re: 6tsch BoF, Brian E Carpenter
          • Re: 6tsch BoF, Melinda Shore
  • Re: 6tsch BoF, SM
  • Re: 6tsch BoF, Dave Crocker
    • Re: 6tsch BoF, Ted Lemon
    • Re: 6tsch BoF, Ofer Inbar
• Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopriv-res-gw-lis-discovery-05, Peter Yee
  • Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopriv-res-gw-lis-discovery-05, Jari Arkko
  • Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopriv-res-gw-lis-discovery-05, Martin Thomson
  • Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-geopriv-res-gw-lis-discovery-08, Peter Yee
• plenary slides, Jari Arkko
• volunteers to take notes in the plenary, Jari Arkko
• Re: [Diversity] setting a goal for an inclusive IETF, Aaron Yi DING