[rfc-i] rfc-interest Digest, Vol 130, Issue 3

Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) rse at rfc-editor.org
Wed Aug 19 12:41:57 PDT 2015


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Hello all,

This address has been unsubscribed from the list. Apologies for the spam
.

- -Heather


On 8/19/15 12:24 PM, Michelle Kosik wrote:
> I'm at my oncologist all day. And I don't understand what you want,
> you want email address? Please explain in more detail. But I'm
> getting chemo today and it wipes me out.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Aug 19, 2558 BE, at 1:00 PM,
>> rfc-interest-request at rfc-editor.org wrote:
>> 
>> Send rfc-interest mailing list submissions to 
>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
>> 
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit 
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest or, via
>> email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to 
>> rfc-interest-request at rfc-editor.org
>> 
>> You can reach the person managing the list at 
>> rfc-interest-owner at rfc-editor.org
>> 
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
>> specific than "Re: Contents of rfc-interest digest..."
>> 
>> 
>> Today's Topics:
>> 
>> 1. Re: rfc-interest Digest, Vol 130, Issue 2 (Michelle Kosik)
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
- -
>>
>>
>> 
Message: 1
>> Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 15:56:29 -0600 From: Michelle Kosik
>> <kosikmichelle at hotmail.com> To: "rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org"
>> <rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org> Subject: Re: [rfc-i] rfc-interest
>> Digest, Vol 130, Issue 2 Message-ID:
>> <BLU436-SMTP14152B76EBD1959BE5E25BAB5780 at phx.gbl> Content-Type:
>> text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>> 
>> I don't understand, what do you want? I was on my computer when
>> that happened and I had no email account on my computer.
>> kosikfl at mail.com is another email address besides that I don't
>> know what you want. Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Aug 18, 2558 BE, at 3:14 PM,
>>> rfc-interest-request at rfc-editor.org wrote: Send rfc-interest
>>> mailing list submissions to rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
>>> 
>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit 
>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest or,
>>> via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to 
>>> rfc-interest-request at rfc-editor.org
>>> 
>>> You can reach the person managing the list at 
>>> rfc-interest-owner at rfc-editor.org
>>> 
>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
>>> specific than "Re: Contents of rfc-interest digest..."
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Today's Topics:
>>> 
>>> 1. Email spam (Michelle Kosik) 2. Re: Proposed change to RFC
>>> references (Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)) 3. Re: Proposed change
>>> to RFC references (Viktor Dukhovni) 4. Re: Proposed change to
>>> RFC references (Brian E Carpenter) 5. Re: Proposed change to
>>> RFC references (Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)) 6. Re: Proposed
>>> change to RFC references (Tony Hansen)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
- --
>>>
>>>
>>> 
Message: 1
>>> Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 13:25:33 -0600 From: Michelle Kosik
>>> <kosikmichelle at hotmail.com> To: "rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org"
>>> <rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org> Subject: [rfc-i] Email spam 
>>> Message-ID: <BLU436-SMTP43454CC1CC047189746295B5780 at phx.gbl> 
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>> 
>>> On the first when I get paid I plan on investing in a private
>>> email that's secure. It will take a while for me to have to
>>> eventually have my email switched over but I'm doing everything
>>> I can to prevent spam. I'm still being taken over by the
>>> government and I are trying to set me up out of spite. I'm very
>>> sorry about your accounts I did delete your information ASAP.
>>> I don't have administrative control over my computer so if
>>> they're trying to blame me for anything it's out of my reach.
>>> If I had the money I would get an Apple computer because they
>>> would be more secure but I don't and the government won't pay
>>> me with it on me I'm really stuck. Sort of held hostage. So I'm
>>> really sorry.
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>> ------------------------------
>>> 
>>> Message: 2 Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 19:27:51 +0000 From: "Joe
>>> Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr at cisco.com> To:
>>> "rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org" <rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org> 
>>> Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Proposed change to RFC references 
>>> Message-ID: <DFE79B49-5975-4AFC-A357-21741AC9C10B at cisco.com> 
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>> 
>>> On 8/17/15, 1:27 PM, "rfc-interest on behalf of Viktor
>>> Dukhovni" <rfc-interest-bounces at rfc-editor.org on behalf of
>>> ietf-dane at dukhovni.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> I find the RFCs much more usable in their HTML form at
>>>> 
>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc<number>
>>>> 
>>>> than in the text and PDF forms linked at the rfc-editor
>>>> site.
>>>> 
>>>> Is there any chance that the RFC editor page will make HTML
>>>> RFCs available? [via https of course]
>>> 
>>> No.  However, there is a chance that the version you get from
>>> the RFC Editor site may one day be more easy to use, and that
>>> we might not always need to tools site in the future.
>>> 
>>>> Otherwise, I'm afraid I don't much care what protocol is used
>>>> to deliver documents via URLs I won't use. :-(
>>> 
>>> I'll take that as a vote for: "that wouldn't bother me, please
>>> proceed."
>>> 
>>> -- Joe Hildebrand
>>> 
>>> ------------------------------
>>> 
>>> Message: 3 Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 20:12:28 +0000 From: Viktor
>>> Dukhovni <ietf-dane at dukhovni.org> To:
>>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Proposed
>>> change to RFC references Message-ID:
>>> <20150818201228.GN24426 at mournblade.imrryr.org> Content-Type:
>>> text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 07:27:51PM +0000, Joe Hildebrand
>>> (jhildebr) wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> Is there any chance that the RFC editor page will make HTML
>>>>> RFCs available? [via https of course]
>>>> 
>>>> No.
>>> 
>>> Please pardon my obvious ignorance, any pointers as to why?
>>> 
>>> The tools.ietf.org HTML rfcs are still just the .txt documents 
>>> (pagination, line breaks, ...), but with usable HTML links.  I
>>> was hoping to see something similar.
>>> 
>>>> However, there is a chance that the version you get from the
>>>> RFC Editor site may one day be more easy to use, and that we
>>>> might not always need the tools site in the future.
>>> 
>>> Specifically, I'd like to have usable links in the table of
>>> contents, usable links in the references, and, to the extent
>>> possible, working links to "Section N of [RFCNNNN]" which link
>>> to the section in question.  And of course the ability to share
>>> links to a specific section or page of an RFC with others.
>>> 
>>> None of the above seem at present to be features of:
>>> 
>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfcNNNN.txt
>>> 
>>> so the above are much less usable than:
>>> 
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfcNNNN
>>> 
>>> -- Viktor.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ------------------------------
>>> 
>>> Message: 4 Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:49:21 +1200 From: Brian E
>>> Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com> To:
>>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Proposed
>>> change to RFC references Message-ID:
>>> <55D39A51.1070401 at gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain;
>>> charset=utf-8
>>> 
>>>> On 19/08/2015 08:12, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: On Tue, Aug 18,
>>>> 2015 at 07:27:51PM +0000, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>> Is there any chance that the RFC editor page will make
>>>>>> HTML RFCs available? [via https of course]
>>>>> 
>>>>> No.
>>>> 
>>>> Please pardon my obvious ignorance, any pointers as to why?
>>> 
>>> Firstly, please note that the RFC Editor landing page for an
>>> RFC, like http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2026, (which is the
>>> preferred first point of call) has information that isn't in
>>> the RFC text itself, and is authoritative about status,
>>> updates, etc. But the .txt file is the canonical format
>>> (today).
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The tools.ietf.org HTML rfcs are still just the .txt
>>>> documents (pagination, line breaks, ...), but with usable
>>>> HTML links.
>>> 
>>> Right, but they are created from the canonical form by an
>>> algorithm and, although very useful, they are therefore not
>>> authoritative: occasionally the algorithm makes mistakes.
>>> 
>>> I don't actually see why the RFC Editor couldn't point to them
>>> as an FYI resource, however.
>>> 
>>> Brian
>>> 
>>>> I wasc hoping to see something similar.
>>>> 
>>>>> However, there is a chance that the version you get from
>>>>> the RFC Editor site may one day be more easy to use, and
>>>>> that we might not always need the tools site in the
>>>>> future.
>>>> 
>>>> Specifically, I'd like to have usable links in the table of
>>>> contents, usable links in the references, and, to the extent
>>>> possible, working links to "Section N of [RFCNNNN]" which
>>>> link to the section in question.  And of course the ability
>>>> to share links to a specific section or page of an RFC with
>>>> others.
>>>> 
>>>> None of the above seem at present to be features of:
>>>> 
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfcNNNN.txt
>>>> 
>>>> so the above are much less usable than:
>>>> 
>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfcNNNN
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ------------------------------
>>> 
>>> Message: 5 Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 21:11:33 +0000 From: "Joe
>>> Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr at cisco.com> To: Viktor Dukhovni
>>> <ietf-dane at dukhovni.org>, "rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org"
>>> <rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org> Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Proposed
>>> change to RFC references Message-ID:
>>> <1C1E9751-5EA5-4366-94FA-69B9C10667C1 at cisco.com> Content-Type:
>>> text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>> 
>>> On 8/18/15, 2:12 PM, "rfc-interest on behalf of Viktor
>>> Dukhovni" <rfc-interest-bounces at rfc-editor.org on behalf of
>>> ietf-dane at dukhovni.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 07:27:51PM +0000, Joe Hildebrand
>>>> (jhildebr) wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>> Is there any chance that the RFC editor page will make
>>>>>> HTML RFCs available? [via https of course]
>>>>> 
>>>>> No.
>>>> 
>>>> Please pardon my obvious ignorance, any pointers as to why?
>>> 
>>> Sorry, I thought you were asking for the URLs to point to the
>>> http(s)://tools.ietf.org/.  I misunderstood.
>>> 
>>> Since the RFC Editor doesn't have control over that site, it
>>> wouldn't make sense to point to it.  Since you were asking for
>>> something much more reasonable, the answer is probably
>>> "yes-perhaps", over time. :)
>>> 
>>>> The tools.ietf.org HTML rfcs are still just the .txt
>>>> documents (pagination, line breaks, ...), but with usable
>>>> HTML links.  I was hoping to see something similar.
>>> 
>>> There are tooling things that would have to be worked out for
>>> older RFCs (seeing when and how the code from tools.ietf.org or
>>> similar might be deployed by the RSE), but new-format RFC's
>>> will definitely have nice HTML published.
>>> 
>>>>> However, there is a chance that the version you get from
>>>>> the RFC Editor site may one day be more easy to use, and
>>>>> that we might not always need the tools site in the
>>>>> future.
>>>> 
>>>> Specifically, I'd like to have usable links in the table of
>>>> contents, usable links in the references, and, to the extent
>>>> possible, working links to "Section N of [RFCNNNN]" which
>>>> link to the section in question.  And of course the ability
>>>> to share links to a specific section or page of an RFC with
>>>> others.
>>>> 
>>>> None of the above seem at present to be features of:
>>>> 
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfcNNNN.txt
>>>> 
>>>> so the above are much less usable than:
>>>> 
>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfcNNNN
>>> 
>>> Nod.  Those are all reasonable things to want.
>>> 
>>> -- Joe Hildebrand
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ------------------------------
>>> 
>>> Message: 6 Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 17:13:54 -0400 From: Tony
>>> Hansen <tony at att.com> To: rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org,
>>> ietf at ietf.org Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Proposed change to RFC
>>> references Message-ID: <55D3A012.1000906 at att.com> Content-Type:
>>> text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>>> 
>>> I support this change.
>>> 
>>> Tony Hansen
>>> 
>>>> On 8/17/15 3:01 PM, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hello all,
>>>> 
>>>> The RFC Editor supports the goal of a more secure and
>>>> trusted Internet. In support of that ideal, the RFC Editor is
>>>> proposing to change how we reference RFCs to use an HTTPS
>>>> URI. This will not impact existing, published RFCs. All pages
>>>> will continue to be available over HTTP as well.
>>>> 
>>>> As an example of the proposed change, a reference would
>>>> change as follow s:
>>>> 
>>>> OLD [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to
>>>> Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997, 
>>>> <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
>>>> 
>>>> NEW
>>>> 
>>>> [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to
>>>> Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997, 
>>>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
>>>> 
>>>> Please direct any questions or discussion to the rfc-interest
>>>> mailing list
>>>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>.
>>> 
>>> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment
>>> was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type:
>>> application/pgp-signature Size: 842 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital
>>> signature URL:
>>> <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/201508
18/47223682/attachment.asc>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
- ------------------------------
>>> 
>>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________ rfc-interest
>>> mailing list rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org 
>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ------------------------------
>>> 
>>> End of rfc-interest Digest, Vol 130, Issue 2 
>>> ********************************************
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ rfc-interest
>> mailing list rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org 
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> End of rfc-interest Digest, Vol 130, Issue 3 
>> ********************************************
> _______________________________________________ rfc-interest
> mailing list rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org 
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
> 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJV1NwFAAoJEER/xjINbZoGBKsH/26D4HBFyNxSIu0a0Ji1hFlW
P25vDKj3Krw32J9ePHEJI74726v7UHIYS4oqEAAbs9AV68Ax9cLj+WHZMbMZsL3X
NN5RBznw9c5pIQBO54vLr1xIeACzJbeim+9vI0ZEfGoOSNxvQ/skz9ymNjG7bF0v
yn30yKAPnBNj/mU0ye+A/lr3YkHh3bvbd2SqMrOGh9i+4X8BeHfzu8mZsXDKULRA
pSdkPADaxkm9VCRUZP6Qvb1+m6mpzholGOetm8+GCaleRsjK3QMbb8T1IMciuUvC
6XUavGa4qhdWvAAEZ+RvFp7OTqdq7ZKby8npfVgh5r77X/itBC2sj2nS1H5ZZjg=
=Frtq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list