At 05:45 PM 2/14/00 -0700, Vernon Schryver wrote:
>In other words and politically correct pretense asside, the IETF is not
>an international organization. Despite its posturing, the IETF is a U.S.
>or perhaps North American organization that welcomes non-U.S. participants
>and occasionally spends
Folks,
Dan Senie and I got tired of keeping separate browser
bookmarks on a myriad of DoS Attack technical info, and
so we decided to slap together a web page which contains
some "good technical resources" on these DoS attacks:
http://www.denialinfo.com/
Of course, it is pretty raw right now,
Graham Klyne wrote:
> But I am still uncomfortable with it. It implies that, somehow, any non-US
> participant is somehow a second class citizen, who is permitted to attend
> purely as a concession by the US elite whose organization this is. Maybe
> that also is true -- but I don't have to like
There is more than America out there ?
;-)
-Original Message-
From: John Stracke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 3:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: IETF Adelaide and interim meetings for APPS WGs
Graham Klyne wrote:
> But I am still uncomfortable
> From: Graham Klyne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >In other words and politically correct pretense asside, the IETF is not
> >an international organization. ...
> As a non-US IETF participant, I found this statement mildly insulting. But
> then I have to ask myself "why?". It is true that a majorit
does anyone know of any implementations of CIP?
thanks,
-rick
A number of protocols/services expose product tags describing
the vendor implementation for a variety purposes. These tags
generally include the "vendor" and some "version" information
and are often used by protocol peers to alter behavior. In some
cases, like HTTP (RFC 2616), they may include v
> From: "Charles E. Perkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ...
> > I really wish "we" actually knew how to filter.
>
> But maybe filtering is putting the cart before the horse.
I agree.
> ...
> >From that analogy, I claim that the appropriate action is to
> develop tracing systems that will help to id
> But maybe filtering is putting the cart before the horse.
I believe in general we have been having a discussion about
operational practices, not really about theoretical ideas
of what we might be able to do twelve to eighteen months
out.
But discussing those theoretical things is good too, but
It is traditional that most IETF meeting attendees have given the
organization they are affiliated with for identification purposes,
whether it is an educational institution, government, other non-profit
group or company.
Donald
PS: I don't see "being international" as a binary thing. Or at le
> Moreover, English centric IETF meetings are hard to be actively
> attended by people whose primary language is not English. Compared
> to other International organizations, IETF requires too much in
> English capability. Worse, in IETF, inactive participation is
> nothing.
It wouuld be
At 11:15 AM 02/15/2000 +, Lloyd Wood wrote:
>A lot of surveillance can be based on 'if A is talking to B, then A
>must be as guilty as B', and message content is irrelevant. This
>helps counters that.
Well, get over it. ;-)
(Smiley included for the humor impaired.)
- paul
Just another question :-) For people who will want static IPs rather than dynamic (I
assume for firewall configuration), will you want to use wireless? I'm told to keep
MBONE/wired and wireless LANs apart and so I'm trying to determine if I need more than
one static address pool.
Note this is
From: Keith McCloghrie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 21:34:38 -0800 (PST)
> Let's see, how many RFC's are not in English? How many WG meetings
> or mailinglists?
>
> That the IETF is de facto an U.S. outfit is not by itself a bad thing.
You seem to be making t
> From: Daniel Senie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Phil Karn wrote:
...
> > Being forced to tunnel not only increases the size of each packet, but
> > also entails suboptimum routing and reliance on yet more network
> > elements. I use the new Linux policy routing mechanisms to tunnel
> > only those pa
On Tue, 15 Feb 2000 15:44:23 GMT, "Parkinson, Jonathan"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> There is more than America out there ?
There's a lot more out there. It's to make up for the fact that in reality,
Idaho, Wyoming, and Rhode Island don't really exist - anybody claiming to
be from one of these
John Stracke wrote:
>In other words, the pretense is self-fulfilling: by claiming (and striving) to
>be global, the IETF avoids driving away non-US participants, which makes the
>IETF more truly global.
Definately!
/ikh
On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 16:04:28 PST, Phil Karn said:
> Source address ingress filtering is one of those ideas that seems like
> a good one when you first think about it, but it just doesn't pan out.
> It interferes with some perfectly legitimate activities, it doesn't
> really stop the bad guys, and
Hi Keith!
Your message and actions are right on In addition to the reasons
and consequences you mentioned, such behavior opens the IETF to
restraint of trade challenges at least in the U.S.
Thanks,
Kathy Dally
MITRE Corp.
Keith Moore wrote:
>
> It has come to the attention of the Applic
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ...
> Well.. as soon as somebody presents us with "the real solution", we'll start
> implementing. In the meantime, filtering is the best we know how to do.
> ...
I really wish "we" actually knew how to filter.
Just as I feared when the news broke, I'm seeing more p
Vern,
The IETF has no dependency of any kind on any government and as you yourself
observed it does its decision taking in cyberspace, not geographical space.
It is as international as any organization I have ever known, and I spent more
20 years working for an international treaty organisation.
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
Keith:
How do I go about geting the schedule for the meetings for the rest of the
year?
I'm new to this forum and will be the Inet Technologies representative in
the future.
Best regards,
Mart Nurmet
972 543-3791
The problem I have with the Adelaide meeting is very simple. With so
few working groups holding sessions, I can't justify making the trip.
This would be true for a meeting at any location more than 400 miles
away. If only one group that I am interested in is holding a session,
I can't go. The p
On Tue, Feb 15, 2000 at 10:22:46AM -0700, Vernon Schryver wrote:
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > ...
> > Well.. as soon as somebody presents us with "the real solution", we'll start
> > implementing. In the meantime, filtering is the best we know how to do.
> > ...
> I really wish "we" actually
% Keith:
%
% How do I go about geting the schedule for the meetings for the rest of the
% year?
%
% I'm new to this forum and will be the Inet Technologies representative in
% the future.
%
% Best regards,
% Mart Nurmet
% 972 543-3791
I'm not keith but can answer your question.
www.i
> From: "Michael H. Warfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ...
> But some of us turn off ICMP except for ICMP_FRAG_NEEDED and keep
> MTU discovery alive while cutting off the ICMP food fights and script
> kiddie probes that seem to be endemic in our current mess.
Why couldn't you do as has been f
> From: Bill Manning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: IETF Adelaide and interim meetings for APPS WGs
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mart Nurmet)
> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 11:14:26 -0800 (PST)
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [...]
> and note that the IETF is composed of indivduals, not corporations.
>
Hello Vernon,
> > Well.. as soon as somebody presents us with "the real solution", we'll start
> > implementing. In the meantime, filtering is the best we know how to do.
> > ...
>
> I really wish "we" actually knew how to filter.
But maybe filtering is putting the cart before the horse.
I c
Why does the IETF registration form ask for a company name?
> > From: Bill Manning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: IETF Adelaide and interim meetings for APPS WGs
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mart Nurmet)
> > Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 11:14:26 -0800 (PST)
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [...]
We are pleased to announce the release of the first issue of our
newsletter of the NLANR measurement and network analysis team: The Network
Analysis Times. It is available at: http://moat.nlanr.net/NATimes/.
This issue includes brief overviews and the current status of each of the
areas that for
I think that, believing that the world is no bigger than America is a common
problem among many US citizens. No offense, so would I if I lived in US,
because after all there is quite a few states and cities to keep track of.
But my point is that we, including the Americans, speak so proudly of the
>From: Vernon Schryver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> ...
>> The basic idea then would be to trace back bad packets that
>> conform to some typically innocent, but occasionally troublesome,
>> profiles. The profiles will become self-evident with experience,
>> and once people know they will be caught b
Jeffry;
IETF is certainly US and English centric.
The current rules of IETF does not explicitely prefer some country
so much, though many important organizations have addresses in US
and English is the language of the rules. However, the rules keep
or amplify the US centric tendency, because a l
I think that, believing that the world is no bigger than America is a common
problem among many US citizens. No offense, so would I if I lived in US,
because after all there is quite a few states and cities to keep track of.
But my point is that we, including the Americans, speak so proudly of the
--On Tuesday, 15 February, 2000 15:22 -0600 Tim Salo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Of course, that leads to the rather interesting dilemma that
> we don't know whether an individual is speaking on behalf or
> his or her self or on behalf of an organization, (again, even
> if we tell that person t
IMHO, people are reading way too much into this.
Most of the participation is by folks from the US -- that stat is raised at
every meeting. BTW, the Internet started in the US, those neat maps
displayed at plenary sessions show an overwhelming focus of connectivity in
the US, and many many tec
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd:
> The primary concern in the IETF is producing good protocols.
I believe that the IETF model -- for better or for worse -- is a
good thing for developing countries, compared to a membership
organization like ISOC. Having said, it does not mean that
organizational improve
38 matches
Mail list logo
