I have a feeling we are going to have t think
VERY hard about the entire schedule for the 54th meeting oin
Yokohama given 80% of folks there wil be on severe sleep
deprivation...
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dave Crocker typed:
>>At 10:02 AM 1/18/2002 -0500, Scott Brim wrote:
>>>Having on
some people don't live in the US but do have families
50% of us are
flying out saturday to be there for sunday all day meetings, flying
eastwards on friday, to get back mid day saturday, we lose 2 weekends.
compare this to intra-US flite to and from, i don';t think esxtending
friday is sustainab
i was promted yesterday by a couple of (brit) WG chairs to send this:
remember -there's some info about london at:
http://www-mice.cs.ucl.ac.uk/ietf/>
as suggested by ietfers - more suggestions always welcome too
note london in august is v popular with tourists as there are so
few cows here so
>>> What. Does that imply the preference of redesign to revision in IETF ?
>>No.
>>"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" is a colloquial saying meaning
>>"Do not embark on repairs of things that do not need repair". It
>>means "Don't repair a non-broken window". "Don't repair a working lamp".
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Steven M. Be
llovin" typed:
>>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bill Manning writes:
>>> semantically confused. why would sailors be on the
>>> bridge? (the one over the canal)
>>Right -- they should be using routers, not bridges.
but there's only 7 seas
there's a discussion on how to make some simple classes of
assymetric multisender apps work with
SSM, but there's not really anything useful
for genuine multi-peer applications - what is needed is to
revitalise the work on bidir pim, and then retrofit the SSM
addressing (.e. what we proposed in r
for those of you in the US
april fools day dates from the introduction of the gregorian calendar
in the 16th century, and invovled moving the start of the year from
apr 1 to jan 1
in france, a posson d'avril is a rather nice phrase for a person who
is subject of one of these (supposed harmless)
IETFers visiting london may wish to check out a few differences
between the way europeans (and the UK is part of "yurp") say things in
english, as this is the dominant language of the IETF meeting, but of
course, american english is not the dominant dialect in blighty.
so first off, when discuss
>>This should be fertile ground for topics for PhD students.
>>We still have PhD students, yes?
yes, but no faculty to advise them - see below
of course, if we fixed the multicast and the mbone (or used
akamai/inktomi/idigital island, foobarbaz.com) we'd be able to
leverage the internet to
;> attitude consistent with the IETF's stated commitment to
>>> open process?
>>>
>>> At 06:52 AM 3/23/01 , Jon Crowcroft wrote:
>>>
>>> >also,the wireless access fro mthe pub was inspired! we got really
>>> >serious bar bof work done without tourists kibbitzing
>>
cheers
jon
ssage <4.2.2.20010323090914.01abfd30@localhost>, Margaret Wasserman typed:
>>
>>Not to pick on Jon specifically, but how is this common IETF
>>attitude consistent with the IETF's stated commitment to
>>open process?
>>
>>At 06:52 AM 3/23/01 , Jon Crowcroft wrot
also,the wireless access fro mthe pub was inspired! we got really
serious bar bof work done without tourists kibbitzing
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, RJ Atkinson typed:
>>At 12:52 22/03/01, William Allen Simpson wrote:
>>>This is a rare case where I disagree with Phil. This is a good
>>>
hi
this is a solicitation to peopel that know london
(the venue for the next ietf)
to send me suggestions for additions to an
"alternative" IETFers guide to things in london
i've made a very modest start at:
http://www-mice.cs.ucl.ac.uk/ietf/
but am happy to add other stuff as people think
bt thanksful, some of us academics have to go to ieee infocom (very
fine conference by the way) in anchorage in a
month...not only same applies, but the minimum journey time from
london england is a 23 hour oneits slightly faster to get to
autralia.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dan Grossm
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim" typed:
>>No rocket science, but perhaps archaeology.
>>In the early 1980s, a unix box (68ks, vaxen, et.al.) came
>>with a multi-volume manuals, including an nroff guide.
>>In this millennium, not all distros have nroff guides.
>>Wh
again, i don't know if the WHOLE IETF list wants to see this
discussion, nor if IDMR (which now looks at a fairly small piece of
the multicast picture) wants to be cc:d - the right place for this
discussion is probably pim, and possibly ssm, - idmr is about ready to
close down
the right solutio
curity (see
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/msec-charter.html
and for many-to-many, for congestion control (to meet transport area
requirements)
i think (but of course i am usually wrong) that we may see progress on
this in 2002...
>>Jon Crowcroft wrote:
>>
>>> In me
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ali Boudani typed:
>>First the CBT protocol was created to use shared tree solutions because
>>DVMRP and the other dense mode protocols werent scalable. there were
>>many problems with CBT (which is bidirectional) so PIM-SM was cretaed
>>which provide some swi
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kyle Lussier typ
ed:
>>> > "is anyone aware of any estimations of fraction of Internet users
>>> > who are behind firewalls and NATs?"
>>How about for business users? If the assumption can be made
>>that most Q3 players are home based (which would probably
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "J. Noel Chiappa" typed:
>>> From: Bob Braden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> I agree with Noel's implication: are the Internet Drafts and RFCs
>>> becoming a vanity press?
>>Ah, Noel didn't mean to imply anything - I was just boggled at the size of
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mohsen BANAN-Public typed:
>>"Does IETF stand for Innovation Extermination Task Force?"
hey , do what you want - its not a hierachical organisation - if its
cool and people adopt it, fine - there's no "standing on the outside
looking in" in the ietf - if you
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, joaquin.riveraro
[EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
>>>I am sure that will help, while the discussion on the standard format goes on,
>>the tools will be helpfull to everyone whatever the final decision
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Stephen McHenry typed
>>On a more serious note, having done a lot of instruction over the years, it
>>shouldn't be about ego (I paid my "understanding dues" - everyone else
>>should too!!), it should be about communication... i.e., how quickly can we
>>eff
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jon Crowcroft typed:
>>on another topic, we noticed that we cannot see certain sites that
>>provide some interesgint IP anonymizing services -we ran a
>>traceroute -p xyzd to them and discovered that some hi-level ISPs are
>&
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, gra
[EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
>>Let's consider a few basic principles.
ok - lots of good points below - a few responses...
>>1. Neither ASCII nor XML are ever displayed. They are CODES for
>>representing characters in a computer. It is the CHARACTERS ( glyp
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jon Crowcroft typed:
>>ii) paper burns at farenheit 451 (ref: burroughs, '63, truffaut '68],
people pointed out (correctly) that the right reference here is
bradbury (ray, of light, not malcolm, of history) and not
burroughs (not Edg
2/2001 +, Jon Crowcroft wrote:
>>>i) the americans spent a lot of money on spaceworthy pens,
>>>but the russians showed that PENCILS are fine
>>>
>>>ii) paper burns at farenheit 451 (ref: burroughs, '63, truffaut '68],
>>>thi
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Taylor Salman typed:
>>ASCII text shouldn't be accepted because:
>>Pen and paper is by far the most portable format on the planet and
>>beyond.
i disagree -
i) the americans spent a lot of money on spaceworthy pens,
but the russians showed that PENCILS are
before you do multicast file transfer, you need to define multicast
transport
right place to look for this is the RMT working group (see ietf web
pages for links) who have LOTS of ideas - the stuff below is part of
the (much bigger now) design space...
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Krist
of course if NAT is so cool,
why not make _every_ hop do NAT (Naughty Awful Terrible stuff)
instead of MPLS (My Protocol's a Lot Slower)
as a way of aggregate traffic engineering without recourse to
level 2 (which we all know is making a lot less money than level 3
right now)
i mean they a
there's some very fancy codes that digital fountain and other
companies doing FEC based reliable multicast have - see tornado codes
and other references
can this and the TCP discussion move to end2end-interest
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
coz its a more appropriate (focussed) place!
In message <[EMAI
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Keith Moore typed:
>>I don't agree that abundant IPv6 addresses remove the need for something
>>akin to a port number. They might remove the need for transport-level
>>multiplexing, but only if any host could allocate a sufficiently large
>>subnet, and it's
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Scott Brim type
d:
>>Although address obfuscation through combining NAT with your firewall
>>can provide a small amount of additional security.
against which attacks ? it doesnt provide better privacy, or non
repudation, or access control, or any normal servic
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "J. Noel Chiappa" typed:
>>Keith, why don't you start an NAT-Haters mailing list, and take all this
>>disgust with NAT's there? (I'm quite serious about this.)
>>You seem to be having problems accepting that fact that NAT's are selling
>>several orders of ma
as a european, i feel i have to be first to respond with:
"We're the government and we're here to help"
having said that, there's some useful references in yr. document
for those of you out there in ietf land without brit TV access ,yo
umight be amused to track down the Mark Thomas Product
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jon Crowcroft typed:
>>if multihoming is killing routing coz default free zone routers have
>>too many entries
>>and NAT is killing users coz they can't get always on addresses
>>why not have multihomed sites (aren't th
on that picture, UCL would have been running triple (or maybe even
quadruple) staccks - we had the x.25/colour book (you did i think),
and the cambridge ring stuff, as well as some weird port expanders and
so on..
to get email between 2 pdp11/44s on a cambridge ring at one point we
used to u
o'dell's GSE draft addressed renumbering perfectly.
In message <5.0.2.1.2.20010123015631.02bbba30@localhost>, "David R. Conrad" typ
ed:
>>Kyle,
>>
>>At 03:53 AM 1/23/2001 -0500, Kyle Lussier wrote:
>>>It is a horried idea to start setting up NATs on cell phones,
>>
>>Hmm. We should proba
here's an idea
if multihoming is killing routing coz deautlk free zone routers have
too many entries
and NAT is killing users coz they can't get always on addresses
why not have multihomed sites (aren't they usually server/core
provider sites) LEASE their standby link address prefixes to access
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Keith Moore typed:
>>> The IETF has done it's job with 6to4, but like you said we can't force
>>> people to deploy it. But let's stop and think about 6to4. Aren't some of
>>> the same "tricks" or ALG's that are planned to make applications work
>>> with IPv4
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Garrett Wollman typed
:
>>Which is, of course, how anonymizing services achieve most of their
>>value. If only one person is using an anonymizer, then they are still
>>effectively traceable. If, on the other hand, that one person is
>>mixed in with 140,000 o
the bggest problems with security ssytems are generally 90% to do with
design errors at level 10 (human, not policitcal, economic,
application, transport etc)
it would be interestign to run a _real_ experiment in 3 types of
voting (comuter based, networked computer based and traiditional) and
se
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Vijay Ramachandran Iyer typed:
>> I am a Masters' student at NCSU in Computer Networking. Recently
>>registered at the ietf.org site. I am toying with the idea for a project
>>in VoIP or Mobile IP for my IP class. What are the relevant RFC's should I
>>be loo
some of the folks on this list aren't american or US citezens and
might think that this is a bit presumptious.but here goes:-
the first thing the white house should do is educate its customers and
organise voting properly
the next thing it should do is apply for membership of the European
U
each recipient chooses mailserver to subscribe whose sig
you trust i.e. a distributed, heteroegenous system.
for exampl,e i dont really care about windows viruses in my mail since
i read mail on a unix system, so i would subscribe to a listserver
that signed windows executables and visual ba
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Francis D
upont typed:
>>Vernon, I fully agree with you: there is no reason to get multipart
>>messages in technical discussion mailing lists. Even if your solution
>>seems drastic this is the way we should go.
i'd prefer to see us develop a more 21st century
one of nature's great dualities: statedulness will take root in the
most barren soil, even though datagrams will try to route around it
j
though if nat speak unto nat, then ipv6 be born
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, RJ Atkinson type
d:
>>At 13:32 17/12/00, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>>From an operator perspective, supporting *2* IP protocols
>>is much harder than supporting just one. If one looks around,
>>very few NOCs on the planet today could reasonably be calle
>>I understand that there are pressures to do multihoming, but I just don't see
>>how NAT (i.e. address sharing) is having much effect one way or the other on
>>the intensity of the pressure to do multi-homing.
NATs allow users to be irresponsible about the addressing since they
dont require
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Sean Doran typed:
>>Wait, it's because of *me* that IPv6 isn't a stunning success compared to NAT?
>
>>I didn't realize that, when I asked the IAB to use their technical insights
>>as a market predictor, that behind the invisible hand of the marketplace
>>lu
i can just see it when the aliens land and ask how to connect to our
infrastructure, we'll have to say
oh we used to have an internet, but it
lost something in the translation
j.
Sean,
there were several interesting talks in the ietf plenary last night and
i'd also like to respond
1/ randy's "woah, the DNS is bust" talk
solution - put your named boot file on your web server and set
up robots.txt right
get the 15 or so most popular search engines to start pul
its appropriate that the 51st ietf is gonna be in the '51st state" -
we've been playing with market forces for 23 years (18 years of
margaret thatcher then john major, then tony blair) - solutons in
london will involve vickrey auctions for the seats - themoney will be
used to pay for upgrading th
>>At least the drafts coming into the IETF don't show the
>>same behavior as scientific papers, which is that title
>>length directly correlates with the number of authors.
perhaps we shpould encourage i-ds (and rfcs) to have authors from as
many countries as possible so that they can be s
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Henning Schulzrinne typed:
>>"Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they are not after you... "
>>Apparently, Pillsbury is on a bigger crusade, as the editorial change at
>>http://cacheoff.ircache.net/ is indeed due to lawyer pressure, based on
>>reports f
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Harald Alvestrand typ
ed:
>>MBONE tunnels to connect, and a widely available (Linux?) client that would
>>connect to that server, and behave like a multicast router?
>>"start this program on a spare PC, and you too can watch the IETF multicast".
we have refl
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Telecom Regulato
ry Commission of Sri Lanka typed:
>>Why cannot IETF arrange Netmeeting sessions. So that all new techniques
>>such as Video, Audio, White board, Chat etc. can be used to exchange the
>>valuable knowledge members posses.
we do - we not only h
anyone with a worthy i-d which is not gonna make it as an RFC could do
worse than consider submiting it to INETa lot of the papers there
are in that line and would then count as prior art, be archival, and
citable.
possible source of pressure/problem:
interestingly enough, in tenure, most u
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Keith Moore typed:
>>OTOH, if I owned that patent, I'd put it to good use...
the normal corporate use of patents is to stop someone else charging
you royalties for something covered by their patent - for example,
cisco might need the NAT patent to stop someone
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Magnus Danielson typed:
>>For most of the time it is just plain stupid, however, there are material wich
>>is published in ID form but later down the line is being dropped but still form
>>the fundament for design decissions made in IDs making it all the way to
SIGCOMM this year...
>>Quality of Content should be left to 'the Law of Natural Selection' and the First
>Amendment Rights of the US Constitution (Freedom of Speech), which is the least
>expensive and the long term good solution.
>>
>>
>>
>>On Wed, 06 Sept
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Maha
devan Iyer typed:
>>
>>
>>On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Barathy, RamaSubramaniam wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Everybody,
>>>
>>> Would it not be nice to have some sort of quality control task force that
>>> assigns a quality level for the web sites through out the worl
>>Multihoming is not a hard problem.
to add to this
making multihoming transparent to the application within the IP level
is a hard problem, but is often _besides_ the point - failover and
fault tolerant applications WANT to know in a timely and explicut
manner when a link or interface fails -
in an ideal world, this would be worked out thru a non linear dynamic
pricing model the same way the airlines do differentiated seat
pricing
we haev ipv4 and ipv6 addresses; they have different cost recovery
models and different utility functions and different marketing dweebs
selling th
o course, if we were to internationalise the elevator ights, we';d
have to syubtract 1 (as we count from zero, not 1) and then they'd all
be even numbersunless of course one of them was the one even
prime...
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Dawson, Peter D" typed:
>>oh... did the other me
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ll
oyd Wood typed:
>>On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, Jon Crowcroft wrote:
>>
>>> yo udont know about RIP then
>>>
>>> if you visit the UK, and are asked to show any files on your computer,
>>> you cannot claim
In message <008601bff09b$8b32e9b0$0a0a@contactdish>, Anthony Atkielski type
d:
>>> Well been British, we are to polite and would not like to make a fuss. :)
>>Yeah, the ones who liked to make a fuss went off and started their own
>>democracies centuries ago.
>>So the British really don
yo udont know about RIP then
if you visit the UK, and are asked to show any files on your computer,
you cannot claim you "cannot remember the key"
that wil lbe deemed evidence that you are witholding evidence and yo
ucan go to jail jus for that.,. i.e. our new crypto-fascist law takes
away the
at the
end points.
what annoys me is that the UK government has persistnytly caimed that
ALL opponents of the bill oppose intercept, when in fact almost all
the ones I've spoken to object to a STUPID pointless waste of money,
not to intercept at feasiable (E.g. end systems - such as
In message <01dc01bfed78$0e7a55a0$0a0a@contactdish>, Anthony Atkielski type
d:
>>I don't understand why the FBI feels that it needs to have a top-secret
>>black box attached to the ISP's network. Why not just have the ISP provide
>>a copy of all e-mail to or from the specified mailbox?
>>Any comments on the content of the draft?
I would go further - first to define by exclusion, secondly to define
a new class of providers (according tro common uisage) so that
discussion can proceed
An ISP _hosts_ its own and customer's hosts. Hosts follow the
hosts requirements RFC, at l
>>Jon, I wonder how WAP will fit into Multicast apps - even
>>if its single line txt based msg's app ?
football scores/(tennis etc)
share price (look at stockbroker trading terminal - they have very
small amount of realestate for the given instrument)
many many things would work v. well
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Parkinson, Jonathan" typed:
>>I disagree, WAP, Wireless Application Protocol, Its a way of transmitting
>>data I.E. to and from the Web. How does this not fall under the Internet
>>Umbrella ?
1 youcan't get at an arbirtrary web page
2/ you can't get at an ar
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alan Simpkins t
yped:
>>Valdis, I agree with you a hundred percent. The most
>>expensive part of infrastructure is pulling the
>>cables/fiber necessary to build the infrastrucuture.
thats why intelsat and a cosortium of telcos has a charity that built
a box th
a technical discussion worth reading is at
http://www.osopinion.com/Opinions/MikeBanahan/MikeBanahan1.html
it would seeem (as i've suspected for a while) that the community in
charge of this development has the same problem as the guy who built
jurassic park - they haev no discipline, or underst
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Parkinson, Jonathan" typed:
>> Anyone care to start a discussion about Bluetooth and how it
>>may/will impact the future of communications ? And the new generation of
>>Virus's that could come along with this technology.
no. but a email thread on
blueto
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mohsen BANAN-Public
typed:
>>I request that you review the attached document and
>>email us your comments to:
>> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
its a nice idea
there is, after all, a free market in standards orgaanisations
however, the ietf is the one with t
the problem with sandboxes is that they are monolithic as is this
discussion of mail - if i have a notion of a compartmentalized system
with users, and access rights (like almost all operating systems from the
late 60s onwards, but not like
simple desk top single user executives as found on many
if once it was a virus
which it wasnt
it surely is a worm now
of course,
microsoft have succeeded beyond david tenenhouses wildest dreams
in active network deployment
:-|
j.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Robinson typed:
>>Even better, why doesn't the IETF employ a bunch of people dressed in
>>black suits and wearing sun glasses to go around and 'enforce' IPv6...
we do, but you keep forgetting.
:-)
j. iab member, and official "man in black"
1/ i think microsoft and the alleged hacker have provived an exxcellent lesson in
active networks
2/ is anyone interested in jamming at the next IETF (folk, jazz, rock, thrash, triphop
etc - you know, primal
scream...) - i can bring a guitar (or bass or flute or something...) but local folks
"noone ever got fired for buying ibm"
this was ironic coz ibm was expensive, but worked
someone should get fired for buying someone elses prodiucts
irony
no class action
just reality checkpoint time...
for a systemic view,
some stuff is engineered better than other stuff - see mark handl
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Masataka Ohta ty
ped:
>> Is it fair if providers using iMODE or WAP are advertised
>> to be ISPs?
>>
>> Is it fair if providers using NAT are advertised to be ISPs?
>>
>>My answer to both questions is
>>
>> No, while they may be Internet S
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "J. Noel Chiappa" typed:
>>> right, noels wrong.
>>Noel is happy to wait, and see who's right. (I've been through this exact
>>same experience before, with CLNP, so I understand the life-cycle.) So far,
>>I've been waiting for quite a few years with IPv6
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Narten typed:
>>> IPv6's claimed big advantage - a bigger address space - turns out
>>> not to be an advantage at all - at least in any stage much short of
>>> completely deployment.
>>Not surprisingly, I disagree.
right, noels wrong.
the amount of
its ironic you should send this today, when 12 million people in
london, england, had to learn to dial 8 digits instead of 7 because of
lack of foresight from the telephone regualtor when re-numbering less
than a decade ago - it is reported that 2--30% of calls today are
misdialled...
repeat aft
henning,
good stuff...
people would do well to read this -
also, all attempts to fix NATs so as to ameliorate these problems
have _exactly_ the same deployment complexity as IPv6 - there's a
quote somewhere from yakov rehkter to this effect (can't find it
exactly, but he was coming the ther w
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matt Crawford typed:
>>> The source address of a datagram was an architectural mistake, and should
>>> never have been in the mandatory packet format.
>>Nahh, the mistake was ignoring the source address when routing & forwarding.
thats an implementation det
>>> Bottom line is that IP-layer interception - even when done "right" -
>>> has fairly limited applicability for location of nearby content.
>>> Though the technique is so widely mis-applied that it might still be
>>> useful to define what "right" means.
>>That sounds overly optimistic.
as ye sow, so shall ye weep...in reading this thread i guess i saw
several problems:
oxymoron alert
"thought...patent"
tautology alert
"sufficiently expensive...lawyer"
internet bogon alert
"find the server"
is a server where the ip address, DNS name, lat/long of the CPU,
memory, disk, or cac
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Graham Klyne typ
ed:
>>As many of us are finding, it seems to become more and more difficult to
>>develop or implement a standard without tripping over somebody-or-other's
>>patent for some piece of technology that many of us would regard as fairly
>>obviou
>>My thought is this: I'd like to see a presumption of lack of novelty if an
>>idea gets raised in a public forum, even if it happens _after_ a patent has
>>been applied for, unless it can be shown that the information came from
>>leakage of proprietary information.
intersting idea
i w
infocom 2000 had 2 sessions (8 papers) from the main people - check
out their web site (papers are online..ia ieee)
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Barbara Bao typed:
>>Dear Friends,
>>
>>For my assignment, I need to know algorithms for discovering layer-3 and
>>layer-2 network topology. Whe
the best work i know of on TCP behaviour _over_ ATM services is the
thesis (and papers by) Olivier Bonaventure -
http://www.info.fundp.ac.be/~obo/
cheers
jon
i was looking thru some old archives (1982 on - yes, thats right, from
just before this years college kids were born)
of the original tcp-ip maillist
and came across a message from mark crispin about a broken vax mailer
flooding neighbor mailservers with SYNs..amazing how nothings new
see
ht
In message <000d01bf834d$88c203c0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Zheng Youquan typed:
>>Several month ago, DiffServ and MPLS is hot topic in network research.
>>But how about now about Internet?
a brief history of time-wasting
in the early 80s, "research" concentrated on egp and dns - this was
quite i
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Steven M. Bell
ovin" typed:
>>Right. Yahoo, though, was flooded mostly by the volume. I worry about
>>high-volume TCP garbage sent to port 80, which you can't filter.
Steve
so in the case that the server resource is overloaded, but not the
link, what you
to people that think that the internet is mostly US centric, and will
go on being so, and that this is relevant to the IETF anyhow -
wrong, wrong, and also wrong!
um the Internet is now mostly commercial - the Eu and Asia each have MORE
money than the US, and also have growth economies. if you
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Parkinson, Jonathan" typed:
>>There is more than America out there ?
>>;-)
you mean america still exists - i thought it was actually a myth like
atlantis
>>
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: John Stracke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>Sent: T
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
