Re: precedence field and mailing lists

On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 11:33:31PM +0100, Lloyd Wood wrote: > On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, Vernon Schryver wrote: > > > > From: Doug Royer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > ... > > > Could you please point me at the standards (or otherwise) documents > > > that describe the semantics of 'Precedence:'? It sounds

RE: SNMP, CORBA and XML

I think the other protocols to be added on are CMIP and TL1. And for sure we still need more then one protocol to do and manage all stuff. Any doubt? -Original Message- From: Yixin Zhu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2000 11:09 PM To: Gayen, Sanjukta, CMDR; [EMAIL PROT

Arrgh! Re: precedence field and mailing lists

> Over the past few weeks I've been replying to a number > of vacation mails sent to me as a result of posting here with: > Now _I'm_ getting them :P Here are the applicable headers. Note the absence of X-loop or precedence headers! To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Out of Office

RE: SNMP, CORBA and XML

Each protocol obviously has its own pros and cons and also areas of application. SNMP is for mail transfer whereas CORBA allows you to work with Live Objects across networks as if whole network is a single machine. The information

RE: HTML forms

Thanks for the confirmation there Lloyd :) J. --- On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, James P. Salsman wrote: > Anyone know whether Opera has microphone upload yet? More to the point, does anyone care? L. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>PGP

Re: Email Privacy eating software

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? - Original Message - From: "Lillian Komlossy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTE

Re: Cryptography

The regulations have changed fairly recently, so it is very likely that few books are up to date. Otherwise, _Applied Cryptography_ provides an excellent overview. - Original Message - From: "Betsy Brennan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 04:17 Sub

Re: Email Privacy eating software

On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > 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? Because other people will know when they'

Re: SNMP, CORBA and XML

Hi Arindam, Pl note SNMP is not same as SMTP. SMTP which expands to "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol" is for mail transfer while SNMP expands to "Simple Network Management Protocol" and is for management of network elements. RFC 2571 on "An Architecture for describing SNMP Management frameworks

Re: Email Privacy eating software

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?

RE: Email Privacy eating software

In the UK we have the same type of problem, this time from my Favorite Company MI5. 'The UK is leading the world when it comes to high-tech spying on its citizens' Please see http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_762000/762514.stm Lets face it, internet service providers will be

Re: Email Privacy eating software

I like this idea! Yeah, if we can reclassify black boxes as munitions, as the NSA has done to encryption for years, then we can claim that we have the "right to bear black boxes". This is great! - Original Message - From: "Jon Crowcroft" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Anthony Atkielski" <[EM

Re: Email Privacy eating software

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Parkinson, Jonathan" typed: >>In the UK we have the same type of problem, this time from my Favorite >>Company MI5. I agree. i also think that there are important lessons for lawmakers in other countries, so it is a suitable subject for IETF discussion. >>'

Re: Email Privacy eating software

From today's Wall Street Journal (http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB963523417716552926.htm): One of the nation's largest Internet-service providers, Earthlink Inc., has refused to install a new Federal Bureau of Investigation electronic surveillance device on its network, saying t

Re: Email Privacy eating software

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Doug Isenberg writes : > From today's Wall Street Journal >(http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB963523417716552926.htm): > >One of the nation's largest Internet-service providers, Earthlink Inc., has >refused to install a new Federal Bureau of Investigat

Re: Email Privacy eating software

On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > That, in turn, would likely require monitoring of the RADIUS traffic, > which (if it were different from release to release) might have forced > the downgrade. RADIUS logfiles provide lots of interesting information. They'll know your dial-up habi

Re: precedence field and mailing lists

At 00.04 -0700 00-07-14, Austin Schutz wrote: > > I sent mail to a mailing list. Not to you. Your autoreply software > > should only reply to mail explicitly To: or Cc: you. > > This breaks for mail aliases. Perhaps, if you are root on >a unix machine, you might want someone sending mail t

Re. Email Privacy eating software

The 'saga' continues... Read Janet Reno's input in all this. "Reno: Web 'Wiretap' Review Underway" by AP: http://wire.ap.org/APnews/?SITE=NYTRO&FRONTID=HOME Looks like the feds are developing a real "love affair" for the electronic mail. "White House Is Retrieving E-Mails" by AP: http://wire.ap.o

Re: Email Privacy eating software

> Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 16:13:35 +0200 (CEST) > From: Steven Cotton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Email Privacy eating software > > On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > > > That, in turn, would likely require monitoring of the RADIUS traffic, > > which (if it were different fr

RE: Email Privacy eating software

-Original Message- From: Steven Cotton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 10:14 AM To: ietf Subject: Re: Email Privacy eating software On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: >> That, in turn, would likely require monitoring of the RADIUS traffic, >> which (

RE: IP service definition

> -Original Message- > From: Randy Bush [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > It is akin to standardizing on what kind of light can come in your > > neighbourhood. > > properly done, and with no adjectives or judgement spin, it could be a > taxonomy of what kinds of light are known. this might

Re: Email Privacy eating software

On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Tim Salo wrote: > > RADIUS logfiles provide lots of interesting information. They'll know your > > dial-up habits, phone number, length of time connected etc. The FBI should > > just start their own ISP. > > How do you know "they" (whoever "they" might be) haven't? Ooh, the

Re: Email Privacy eating software

> How do you know "they" (whoever "they" might be) haven't? Because they don't know how. And we know that they don't know how because they are still setting up stupid things like Carnivore.

Re: Email Privacy eating software

On Fri, 14 Jul 2000 18:43:29 +0200, Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > How do you know "they" (whoever "they" might be) haven't? > > Because they don't know how. And we know that they don't know how because > they are still setting up stupid things like Carnivore. It has long been

Re: precedence field and mailing lists

> > I sent mail to a mailing list. Not to you. Your autoreply software > > should only reply to mail explicitly To: or Cc: you. > > This breaks for mail aliases. not if you tell your vacation program which mail aliases are yours. There was once another draft proposal by Jacob Palme fo

Re: IP service definition

Brijesh; > NAT is no less offender of the end > to end design paradigm, than WAP and AOL. Of course. Who said otherwise? Masataka Ohta