From nobody Thu Apr 2 12:25:29 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B54B3A0FEB for ; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 12:25:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n7kY12IFIDp8 for ; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 12:25:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ua1-x930.google.com (mail-ua1-x930.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::930]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C63873A0FEA for ; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 12:25:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ua1-x930.google.com with SMTP id a6so1765908uao.2 for ; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 12:25:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=iXAoq8oZpndihppDTDK9nQKZNZBl/bsh06UuFmGUbGI=; b=lsn0HJZcFWxnXLIKiJ2WH6PMvI8bY4QcfQ3t1XIogI1BhoaowlpqKs4L1i5O+E2IsW SzFtTtMCP58SsoWLyphQDg4himMehVreyXw04v9JmLwXyIk1i0034ZtV9tbRnTgq6Dfo pxyBOc8Jrp7wrAcWMcPiJjr7OPPtZVXlHDe4PS3YCJgacZdVLkPta1jkxjaMX7p7P536 0/3uZovUBaBODJvVYKEJYF5ebnVUXpEo0aOGlUrSdmJ4v0AuGxv3kllVh0rYmPAzeFTb wY1L8knPtAq8GR11fAq+un5DNxMM97Pc6NYS/yfgo9kdbyAgfY8VyW56mfoxBqsnj4HB SDwQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=iXAoq8oZpndihppDTDK9nQKZNZBl/bsh06UuFmGUbGI=; b=igAI10tmCFEd1dJ080/TOm+mJUzpn3wOFnK91CjLnzaIoR+wkU1HjYmE75M59q4aJF X780CgGYRzUYhBf7jz6Xy8tNG3dQ5lnFSnfGPC4yfbRWgmIvZY3ukURJutwB16vtIY8n HZ2g0RrPlrhfst9XvQOgurV8Mdelafwyvhz2OqjQkM917Z2uJdKMfUB9pDrrypDOqVdS 9wROR7/JoqSWMiF4YiWSZhGb6cb8KV/MIWGFHeQBk//IeiZhDAV2Ww4rntEE6OBYI+XV MzRp+jYftcrtx/9h7ozZ3llLVz90tEw/igZgkFLXnYbIpF8PxOs1eRXpU5b+9nlYLjI+ kZKQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZLR+1i/lDb4oX6UZMR71AEHYJOI9wg5Co2xdB1+T9oxmUj1g/a shysyNjbv9eM55xPMiBpDXORIAXOe+3sG4WwUd4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJL9eDEW/broNVmP3YBO8ZbJDIcdX5hXCO+XxLKCKlZqrEt/2qMDVIM065hxVR58VIJsmwJsPLBk2ceePV4PWw= X-Received: by 2002:a9f:2204:: with SMTP id 4mr3859221uad.87.1585855525781; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 12:25:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2020 12:25:14 -0700 Message-ID: To: E Sam Cc: DISPATCH WG Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000047871905a253c324" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] Internet Draft for NNTP additions submitted X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 19:25:29 -0000 --00000000000047871905a253c324 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Do you have a link to this draft? I find no match in the datatracker. -MSK On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 7:13 AM E Sam wrote: > For some strange reason I dont think my email went through. > So here it is again. > > I know we=E2=80=99re all deep into IETF107 talk but when you have time ch= eck it > out. > > Hello all, > > I have made the first I-D for the NNTP additions. It has been submitted t= o > the IETF datatracker. The file name is draft-sam-nntpupdates-00.txt > > > Some notes: > Since we have the errata to change, this draft is by no means represent > all the changes we need to make. > > I reintregrated the dynamic feed proposed in 1999 because I still think > it is a good idea for tempory adjustments to newsfeeds (for example: when= a > certain newsgroups is getting a spam wave etc.) Peers communicating feed > info out of band (e.g: emails) is still recommended due to the variety of > information needed and to avoid =E2=80=9Ccommand creep=E2=80=9D > > Maybe we can also work on USEFOR/USAGE in some way if it interestes the > participants - however we want to be NNTP focused since it is a NNTP > working group after all. > > I found some errors in some of the RFCs I referenced - I will be > submitting an errata soon. > > Thanks > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > --00000000000047871905a253c324 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Do you have a link to this draft?=C2=A0 I find no mat= ch in the datatracker.

-MSK

On Sat, Mar 2= 1, 2020 at 7:13 AM E Sam <winshe= ll64@gmail.com> wrote:
For some strange reason I dont think m= y email went=C2=A0through.=C2=A0
So here it is again= .

I know we=E2=80=99re a= ll deep into IETF107 talk but when you have time check it out.

Hello all,

I have mad= e the first I-D for the NNTP additions. It has been submitted to the IETF d= atatracker. The file name is draft-sam-nntpupdates-00.txt


Some no= tes:
=
Since we have the errata to chan= ge, this draft is by no means represent all the changes we need to make.

I= reintregrated=C2=A0the dynamic feed proposed in=C2=A01999 because I still think it is a good idea= for tempory adjustments to newsfeeds (for example: when a certain newsgrou= ps is getting a spam wave etc.) Peers communicating feed info out of band (= e.g: emails) is still recommended due to the variety of information needed = and to avoid =E2=80=9Ccommand creep=E2=80=9D
=
Maybe we can also work on USEFOR/USAGE in some way if= it interestes=C2=A0 the participants - however we want to be NNTP focused = since it is a NNTP working group after all.

I found some errors in s= ome of the RFCs I referenced - I will be submitting an errata soon.

Thanks
_______________________________________________
dispatch mailing list
dispatch@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
--00000000000047871905a253c324-- From nobody Sun Apr 5 04:38:14 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EAB33A0AD1 for ; Sun, 5 Apr 2020 04:38:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id acSul35vUzIz for ; Sun, 5 Apr 2020 04:38:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from denver.dinauz.org (denver.dinauz.org [37.59.56.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 901843A0AD3 for ; Sun, 5 Apr 2020 04:38:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by denver.dinauz.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38B47623CD; Sun, 5 Apr 2020 13:38:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from denver.dinauz.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (denver.dinauz.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UXCjWQuXZ8rB; Sun, 5 Apr 2020 13:38:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from macbook-pro-de-julien-elie.home (lfbn-idf3-1-527-171.w86-252.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.252.110.171]) by denver.dinauz.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F29CB605A0; Sun, 5 Apr 2020 13:38:04 +0200 (CEST) To: dispatch@ietf.org, ietf-nntp@lists.eyrie.org References: From: =?UTF-8?Q?Julien_=c3=89LIE?= Organization: TrigoFACILE -- http://www.trigofacile.com/ Message-ID: <54da6d7a-23da-aa43-92e1-64903c1ad053@trigofacile.com> Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2020 13:38:04 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] Internet Draft for NNTP additions submitted X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2020 11:38:11 -0000 Hi all, > I have made the first I-D for the NNTP additions. It has been submitted > to the IETF datatracker. The file name is draft-sam-nntpupdates-00.txt https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-sam-nntpupdates-00.txt Here are a few comments: > Article numbers MUST lie between 1 and 9,223,372,036,854,775,807, > inclusive. The client and server MAY use leading zeroes in > specifying article numbers but MUST NOT use more than 19 digits. We'll need to define a capability to advertise that new feature. Note that Ken Murchison once suggested (in 2005) a LARGEGROUP extension, which seems to be a reasonable implementation according to a few discussions since that time: https://lists.eyrie.org/pipermail/ietf-nntp/2005-July/005720.html ************************************************* - Servers which support 64-bit (large) article counters advertise a capability such as 'LARGEGROUP' (or some better named capability). - Servers always hide (411 response for [LIST]GROUP, ommission from LIST ACTIVE response) groups which have exceeded the 32-bit article count from clients until the client tells the server that it can support such groups. - A client tells the server that it supports large groups by using the new keyword 'LARGEGROUP' as an argument to the CAPABILITY command. - The server can then use the existing response codes for the [LIST]GROUP and LIST ACTIVE commands. ************************************************* Also note Clive Feather's BIGNUM proposal: https://lists.eyrie.org/pipermail/ietf-nntp/2005-July/005802.html > 4.1. XPAT As for improvements in extended wildmat searches, we'll need standardizing how uwildmat works. Hopefully this is quite well explained in INN's documentation: https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/software/inn/docs/uwildmat.html The major challenge though PAT is how to deal with whitespace and MIME-encoded strings in header fields, and of course also internationalized header fields. Examples: Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?CNFS_sur_INN2_was:_Et_l=c3=a0=2c_=c3=a7a_refonctionne_=3f?= =?UTF-8?Q?_-_no_reply_-_ignore?= Newsgroups: trigofacile.test.ᾅ > 4.2. WHOAMI A IANA registry for returned information (and future new information) will be useful to add in our current NNTP IANA registry. Note the behaviour of (unstandardized) XUID command in news.individual.net: XUID 280 User information User-ID: 90977 EID: none Access: [90977] Client: denver.dinauz.org (37.59.56.11) Reading: allowed Posting: allowed Newnews: allowed Posting into readonly groups: not allowed Setting Approved header: not allowed Cancel-Lock addition: enabled Setting individual path header: not allowed Sending cancel control messages and supersedes: allowed Sending newgroup/rmgroup control messages: not allowed LIST ACTIVE does not include control.cancel Organization: extern Subscription: expires in 361 days (2021-04-01) UID check for cancel messages: yes UID check for supersedes messages: yes Amount of articles posted today: 0 (Maximum: 100) . And similar useful information could be given to peers, giving them known configuration (max article size, fed newsgroups, path, spam policy...). > 5. Dynamic Feeds I see that you re-integrated ideas from old draft for Dynamic Feed Adjustment. That's great! http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/nntp/drafts/draft-court-dynfeed-01.txt > 6. Header Related Commands Besides IHAVEHDR, we should have a look at how Diablo implements its "MODE HEADFEED" to correctly standardize header-only feed. Maybe CHECKHDR and TAKEHDR will also be useful. > Maybe we can also work on USEFOR/USAGE in some way if it interestes  the > participants - however we want to be NNTP focused since it is a NNTP > working group after all. We'll have to prioritize efforts between needed NNTP extensions and improvements in article format. FWIW, other possible work I had in mind: - DANE/DNSSEC for NNTP (to advertise the use of NNTP/TLS on port 563) - BATCH command, with rnews format - update to RFC 3977 (either NNTP Version 3 or integrate all errata somehow) - full-text search extension (in bodies) - internationalized Netnews headers (newsgroups, distributions, mails...) - USEAGE (Usenet Best Practice) - format of NoCeM articles (for cancels) - format and use of PGPMoose (signing articles) - format of signed control articles / pgpverify stuff Well, that's a great amount of job! -- Julien ÉLIE « Petite annonce : Sourd rencontrerait sourde pour terrain d'entente. » From nobody Fri Apr 10 15:18:47 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 384F23A0FDC; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 15:18:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YF50urg_bFQc; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 15:18:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B249F3A0FD8; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 15:18:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 479F4F406D8; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 15:18:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 89YC4SkkVZfl; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 15:18:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.rfc-editor.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75ADCF406CD; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 15:18:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 81.174.202.163 (SquirrelMail authenticated user rfcpise) by www.rfc-editor.org with HTTP; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 15:18:28 -0700 Message-ID: <8dc45105cca508bc6981e0be2b709508.squirrel@www.rfc-editor.org> Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 15:18:28 -0700 From: "RFC ISE (Adrian Farrel)" To: dispatch@ietf.org Cc: rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org, draft-ucarion-json-type-definition@ietf.org Reply-To: rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.21 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Archived-At: Subject: [dispatch] Heads up - JSON Data Definition Format (JDDF) X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 22:18:45 -0000 Hi Dispatch, draft-ucarion-json-type-definition has been presented to the Independent Submissions Editor for publication as an RFC. During review it was suggested to me that the topic might be of sufficient interest that a WG could be formed, but there doesn't seem to be quite that level of enthusiasm. In discussing this with the ADs, they suggested I should flag this to you. I'd certainly be interested in hearing any comments, and if Dispatch wanted to take this on that would be worth knowing. Thanks, Adrian -- Adrian Farrel (ISE), rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org From nobody Wed Apr 15 06:56:53 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32B693A060D; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 06:56:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.215 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.215 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.398, MAY_BE_FORGED=1.496, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nostrum.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Iygh1bqQqfRg; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 06:56:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3C903A086C; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 06:56:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.127.239] (mta-70-120-123-175.stx.rr.com [70.120.123.175] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 03FDukUt011397 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 15 Apr 2020 08:56:47 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1586959008; bh=RsDmxXgc+7UR2JdfpCFy6vVeTrIDWTj3diCgeNjpZ/g=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=XMqAR0mME5UNP6GMKXa/spfVMCYPobRDDGQcUNuLYvsL3vvojJoAGmD/OsXqieKl5 rmZP4Y9Mtw0JaaqHnia2RSpoQUqpW/7MPH/q8JsGKpvF8TEqhM8AXrkxO6vJkbSejz FUDooXjHPDat1TVIByAHKRTarTeI3S7MGqVS0kaQ= X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host mta-70-120-123-175.stx.rr.com [70.120.123.175] (may be forged) claimed to be [192.168.127.239] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\)) From: Ben Campbell X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <8dc45105cca508bc6981e0be2b709508.squirrel@www.rfc-editor.org> Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 08:56:39 -0500 Cc: DISPATCH WG , draft-ucarion-json-type-definition@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <3617696E-39D1-45C4-A787-64F2823F450C@nostrum.com> References: <8dc45105cca508bc6981e0be2b709508.squirrel@www.rfc-editor.org> To: rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] Heads up - JSON Data Definition Format (JDDF) X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 13:56:51 -0000 Hi Everyone, Does anyone have comments for Adrien? Thanks! Ben. > On Apr 10, 2020, at 5:18 PM, RFC ISE (Adrian Farrel) = wrote: >=20 > Hi Dispatch, >=20 > draft-ucarion-json-type-definition has been presented to the = Independent > Submissions Editor for publication as an RFC. >=20 > During review it was suggested to me that the topic might be of = sufficient > interest that a WG could be formed, but there doesn't seem to be quite > that level of enthusiasm. >=20 > In discussing this with the ADs, they suggested I should flag this to = you. > I'd certainly be interested in hearing any comments, and if Dispatch > wanted to take this on that would be worth knowing. >=20 > Thanks, > Adrian > --=20 > Adrian Farrel (ISE), > rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org >=20 > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch From nobody Sat Apr 18 05:20:11 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 461163A046A for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 05:20:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fastmail.com header.b=O7ToKD5g; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=3IvHtK/k Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CUgMwudYduj6 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 05:20:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBC373A045E for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 05:20:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9810613; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 08:20:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 18 Apr 2020 08:20:05 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.com; h= subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm2; bh=C jQSlYJCIVrYysdOHu9tmP4qi+eMiyX+49ltZgGuEpM=; b=O7ToKD5g7gg/4LLCR 3/jKoJxtq/gG215DhFnlbb7/t3iWk8T1mHEy+oaaljniFtXJ2MA/LUGDSHNtO5Lf JrXSmJs0si35nfouk9ePhNPnuM1WdNmFyOI3E+xvu5JnT8wNnCkK6EU7xj7o4y/a 41rLUPFDBHSPcLS+vwdttuFSsrN9/V4PCSWzRoEv0kq6HFamC6StqdH6hnT5tlvF dfnqXABqxX54Eds7i85GFQXbNpSuFLU8KnkanElZ9zkUdfug7kGlF/SPyDCqDoZJ pF8n8I9TxHDp1TM2W/1Hw/CnoFc4TJfVfVvvn93FcjJvqvbQntq25I1bIbyYM07m HgjxQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=CjQSlYJCIVrYysdOHu9tmP4qi+eMiyX+49ltZgGuE pM=; b=3IvHtK/kJkLcDkAk1ry+y/h4TUvHpr4+8M6lMLRdmGRqO3FGkM3NeD+9r w8MUmRblioyYUscReUNc0lYf/Yz9qbNS1aA9eVCHRsOZu6ZqzeC1Lwb9swJyM0sn ML9Ej4sOzQWX5bpU8d+O/dkk1hyq1iYNswpL80/+ZiFq9dCiQFr3Escsg9cajHgG tz7EoqGDK9nVXvJ0wMc/ER+V6iPqGICGQLk+N9v27NsBT27PyhFZj2DI/qJj952v ljV4FlI6dbefmfDB37UjQXsMCyvYkCoYxNI9BfxBatCz1AGPhP0MugzF1szNcefe maoArk6FVQQc8B7XnTh9B8GgfKy2w== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrfeelgdehfecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefuvfhfhfhokffffgggjggtgfesthekredttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepmfgvnhcu ofhurhgthhhishhonhcuoehmuhhrtghhsehfrghsthhmrghilhdrtghomheqnecuffhomh grihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghdpvgihrhhivgdrohhrghenucfkphepjeegrdejjedrkeeh rddvhedtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomh epmhhurhgthhesfhgrshhtmhgrihhlrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Received: from localhost.localdomain (cpe-74-77-85-250.buffalo.res.rr.com [74.77.85.250]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 8AEFF328005E; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 08:20:04 -0400 (EDT) To: =?UTF-8?Q?Julien_=c3=89LIE?= , dispatch@ietf.org, ietf-nntp@lists.eyrie.org References: <54da6d7a-23da-aa43-92e1-64903c1ad053@trigofacile.com> From: Ken Murchison Organization: FastMail US LLC Message-ID: <87cf665d-97c1-fd95-9f05-793d722d5195@fastmail.com> Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 08:20:03 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <54da6d7a-23da-aa43-92e1-64903c1ad053@trigofacile.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] [NNTP] Internet Draft for NNTP additions submitted X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 12:20:08 -0000 On 4/5/20 7:38 AM, Julien ÉLIE wrote: > Hi all, > >> I have made the first I-D for the NNTP additions. It has been >> submitted to the IETF datatracker. The file name is >> draft-sam-nntpupdates-00.txt > > https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-sam-nntpupdates-00.txt > > > Here are a few comments: > >>    Article numbers MUST lie between 1 and 9,223,372,036,854,775,807, >>    inclusive.  The client and server MAY use leading zeroes in    >> specifying article numbers but MUST NOT use more than 19 digits. > We'll need to define a capability to advertise that new feature. > > Note that Ken Murchison once suggested (in 2005) a LARGEGROUP > extension, which seems to be a reasonable implementation according to > a few discussions since that time: > https://lists.eyrie.org/pipermail/ietf-nntp/2005-July/005720.html > > ************************************************* > - Servers which support 64-bit (large) article counters advertise a > capability such as 'LARGEGROUP' (or some better named capability). > > - Servers always hide (411 response for [LIST]GROUP, ommission from LIST > ACTIVE response) groups which have exceeded the 32-bit article count > from clients until the client tells the server that it can support such > groups. > > - A client tells the server that it supports large groups by using the > new keyword 'LARGEGROUP' as an argument to the CAPABILITY command. > > - The server can then use the existing response codes for the > [LIST]GROUP and LIST ACTIVE commands. > ************************************************* > > > Also note Clive Feather's BIGNUM proposal: > https://lists.eyrie.org/pipermail/ietf-nntp/2005-July/005802.html At this point, why not just define a NNTP VERSION 3 capability which indicates that all commands that accept/return article numbers can be 63 bit?  This requires no changes to existing commands, and clients will know right away from the capabilities whether they should proceed or not. -- Kenenth Murchison Senior Software Developer Fastmail US LLC From nobody Sat Apr 18 23:57:08 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BDF23A1A7B for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 23:57:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8NtKy-vBYSED for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 23:57:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from denver.dinauz.org (denver.dinauz.org [37.59.56.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F8853A1A7A for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 23:57:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by denver.dinauz.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2969B65709; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 08:57:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from denver.dinauz.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (denver.dinauz.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o6PkqMf9dNqG; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 08:57:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from macbook-pro-de-julien-elie.home (lfbn-idf3-1-527-171.w86-252.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.252.110.171]) by denver.dinauz.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EB53464591; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 08:57:00 +0200 (CEST) To: Ken Murchison , dispatch@ietf.org, ietf-nntp@lists.eyrie.org References: <54da6d7a-23da-aa43-92e1-64903c1ad053@trigofacile.com> <87cf665d-97c1-fd95-9f05-793d722d5195@fastmail.com> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Julien_=c3=89LIE?= Organization: TrigoFACILE -- http://www.trigofacile.com/ Message-ID: <679b3742-5d41-696c-1d38-21ed971ba801@trigofacile.com> Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 08:55:36 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87cf665d-97c1-fd95-9f05-793d722d5195@fastmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] [NNTP] Internet Draft for NNTP additions submitted X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 06:57:06 -0000 Hi Ken, >> ************************************************* >> - Servers which support 64-bit (large) article counters advertise a >> capability such as 'LARGEGROUP' (or some better named capability). >> >> - Servers always hide (411 response for [LIST]GROUP, ommission from LIST >> ACTIVE response) groups which have exceeded the 32-bit article count >> from clients until the client tells the server that it can support such >> groups. >> >> - A client tells the server that it supports large groups by using the >> new keyword 'LARGEGROUP' as an argument to the CAPABILITY command. >> >> - The server can then use the existing response codes for the >> [LIST]GROUP and LIST ACTIVE commands. >> ************************************************* > > At this point, why not just define a NNTP VERSION 3 capability which > indicates that all commands that accept/return article numbers can be 63 > bit?  This requires no changes to existing commands, and clients will > know right away from the capabilities whether they should proceed or not. This would mean that the server will send 63-bit article numbers to clients that may not be prepared to deal with them. In answers to LIST ACTIVE and GROUP for instance. It may make them crash (segfault) and break inter-operability... -- Julien ÉLIE « En fait, je n'ai qu'une prétention, c'est de ne pas plaire à tout le monde. Plaire à tout le monde, c'est plaire à n'importe qui. » (Sacha Guitry) From nobody Sun Apr 19 05:41:25 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24D293A0814 for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 05:41:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KMhuSSRs5yxn for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 05:41:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from denver.dinauz.org (denver.dinauz.org [37.59.56.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EA0D3A080C for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 05:41:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by denver.dinauz.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6062765709; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 14:41:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from denver.dinauz.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (denver.dinauz.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1tf2jOYdTLWR; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 14:41:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from macbook-pro-de-julien-elie.home (lfbn-idf3-1-527-171.w86-252.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.252.110.171]) by denver.dinauz.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 325AD64591; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 14:41:20 +0200 (CEST) To: ietf-nntp@lists.eyrie.org, dispatch@ietf.org References: <54da6d7a-23da-aa43-92e1-64903c1ad053@trigofacile.com> <87cf665d-97c1-fd95-9f05-793d722d5195@fastmail.com> <679b3742-5d41-696c-1d38-21ed971ba801@trigofacile.com> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Julien_=c3=89LIE?= Organization: TrigoFACILE -- http://www.trigofacile.com/ Message-ID: Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 14:41:19 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] [NNTP] Internet Draft for NNTP additions submitted X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 12:41:24 -0000 Hi, > Lets be honest, every newsreader that is going to support 64 bit article > numbers already has its been more than 10 years. We should do it in a > way that allows for new conforming newsreaders while not breaking old ones. Pretty easy to test. Just done with a dummy news server, and Thunderbird Version 68.7.0 (64 bit) released on April 8th, 2020. By hand: % telnet localhost 50300 200 Testing server CAPABILITIES 101 Capability list: VERSION 2 3 LIST ACTIVE READER . LIST 215 Newsgroups in form "group high low status" trigofacile.test 9000000000000000000 9000000000000000000 y . QUIT I configure Thunderbird to access this dummy news server. 200 Testing server MODE READER 200 Reader mode LIST 215 Newsgroups in form "group high low status" trigofacile.test 9000000000000000000 9000000000000000000 y . GROUP trigofacile.test 211 1 9000000000000000000 9000000000000000000 trigofacile.test [Thunderbird then just hangs.] I change article numbers, and retest: 200 Testing server MODE READER 200 Reader mode GROUP trigofacile.test 211 1 900 900 trigofacile.test XOVER 900-900 500 What? HEAD 900 500 What? (I have not implemented responses to XOVER and HEAD. Thunderbird looks fine, though, with article number 900.) Another test: 200 Testing server MODE READER 200 Reader mode GROUP trigofacile.test 211 1 2147483648 2147483648 trigofacile.test [Thunderbird then just hangs.] And last test: 200 Testing server MODE READER 200 Reader mode GROUP trigofacile.test 211 1 2147483647 2147483647 trigofacile.test XOVER 2147483647-2147483647 500 What? HEAD 2147483647 500 What? So, 2^31-1 works fine, but above not. There is really interoperability problem with current news readers (in 2020), so defining VERSION 3 of NNTP like this is very dangerous. -- Julien ÉLIE « C'est la goutte qui fait déborder l'amphore ! » (Assurancetourix) From nobody Sun Apr 19 05:56:15 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C2873A0877 for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 05:56:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.053 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.053 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tHWCDLi6kyKc for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 05:56:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm1-x32d.google.com (mail-wm1-x32d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 764223A0876 for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 05:56:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id x25so7805982wmc.0 for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 05:56:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=KXDJFQcQJYIUq/BQCoRHb8v72UWWapqQBBcStCvdwrA=; b=a61ZmaS+uDAKEeIOG9ESXVvBbmhURz6Zt36sN5UoZU0/+fhUm/0eDa4weKFW39J/aK YT6876mVP+oPB7nAodiY0lSiKm701I8n7lqOBj+S+TVaM7EhQthvZIOgFkxZPAEPn9L4 Y3eDziec42RjALidvpOokK+RxiPgywsh5oRuwk7dOOsHkTS7SI4wthUAeKEuIycgvNie 76sEo56W2sg8H454uLXeftpNdhkeAzz7XBZE50sUNNIX5fHTJ4zkk6+Awz960G0lw1cf qhm/A6q9IauYpcrl3YiofA0fmu/d/5x9kCKT/cdr5hvNtmApOjj1Jme+CI9xejxx6O3M FmJQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=KXDJFQcQJYIUq/BQCoRHb8v72UWWapqQBBcStCvdwrA=; b=kHCe5C0cIDU9l7JJnbpqbZlNK9/t42iHGpQ3bkQPy8IX5W/WLlqiHU8qz4iKzYCRMk iVNCbVCwBXCxGnRsnPEa2uFggHuSuGGpHoIplKHzu7E2449AulPBo+/bEMOp0E+27VEv ilUAxLQq4RW3JWeyU6NLwibQa5qoLoLGm9EX/kHyhwmXdUy7WV30LvN+qf9IIpctee6k IWlNncYgbgkz7DPVqDrtKGBn7BJJ5cc4GmehQzGVYf+joNWy384ZoU+LPaEcNhMuVZwY Q6ZW3pzFLqiaXaoPqv54S7e9lKx5Io8cRg/JU99R9f70LniD6usMB030G30RwnImoNfQ r/Dg== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYaaB78CyP+IF+fxE1cQm5JGFNpEJj5MMrLgQJkk3aeQJoJu1FX mCm9+lAOnmIB3QP1bBuxRr8UMSiinzWzIJKr9KQzPw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJT/IsoZPtPDE7lJMxKwOCxE0yIEOBm8uEa9hXXdG5MX8s1ydcQ/P1qIYjJv/6jfJFdV/d3DmTnGycTAYnH8fI= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:770f:: with SMTP id t15mr12392996wmi.178.1587300969804; Sun, 19 Apr 2020 05:56:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <54da6d7a-23da-aa43-92e1-64903c1ad053@trigofacile.com> <87cf665d-97c1-fd95-9f05-793d722d5195@fastmail.com> <679b3742-5d41-696c-1d38-21ed971ba801@trigofacile.com> In-Reply-To: From: E Sam Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 08:55:59 -0400 Message-ID: To: DISPATCH WG , =?UTF-8?B?SnVsaWVuIMOJTElF?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000074f86a05a3a44e72" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] [NNTP] Internet Draft for NNTP additions submitted X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 12:56:14 -0000 --00000000000074f86a05a3a44e72 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Oh so thats why thunderbird broke under my highwinds-omicron-Greg Lyda Inc. account Thats true, so yes defining it like this could be very dangerous. All the big tools to download binaries are open source can easily support asking for 64 bit article numbers (they download by MID anyway, so woudlnt be an issue). I agree with what Julien or someone said about adding a LARGEGROUP capability instead of assuming it under Version 3. On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 8:41 AM Julien =C3=89LIE w= rote: > Hi, > > > Lets be honest, every newsreader that is going to support 64 bit articl= e > > numbers already has its been more than 10 years. We should do it in a > > way that allows for new conforming newsreaders while not breaking old > ones. > > Pretty easy to test. > Just done with a dummy news server, and Thunderbird Version 68.7.0 (64 > bit) released on April 8th, 2020. > > By hand: > > % telnet localhost 50300 > 200 Testing server > CAPABILITIES > 101 Capability list: > VERSION 2 3 > LIST ACTIVE > READER > . > LIST > 215 Newsgroups in form "group high low status" > trigofacile.test 9000000000000000000 9000000000000000000 y > . > QUIT > > > > > I configure Thunderbird to access this dummy news server. > > 200 Testing server > MODE READER > 200 Reader mode > LIST > 215 Newsgroups in form "group high low status" > trigofacile.test 9000000000000000000 9000000000000000000 y > . > GROUP trigofacile.test > 211 1 9000000000000000000 9000000000000000000 trigofacile.test > > [Thunderbird then just hangs.] > > > I change article numbers, and retest: > > 200 Testing server > MODE READER > 200 Reader mode > GROUP trigofacile.test > 211 1 900 900 trigofacile.test > XOVER 900-900 > 500 What? > HEAD 900 > 500 What? > > (I have not implemented responses to XOVER and HEAD. Thunderbird looks > fine, though, with article number 900.) > > > > Another test: > > 200 Testing server > MODE READER > 200 Reader mode > GROUP trigofacile.test > 211 1 2147483648 2147483648 trigofacile.test > > [Thunderbird then just hangs.] > > > > And last test: > > 200 Testing server > MODE READER > 200 Reader mode > GROUP trigofacile.test > 211 1 2147483647 2147483647 trigofacile.test > XOVER 2147483647-2147483647 > 500 What? > HEAD 2147483647 > 500 What? > > > So, 2^31-1 works fine, but above not. > > There is really interoperability problem with current news readers (in > 2020), so defining VERSION 3 of NNTP like this is very dangerous. > > -- > Julien =C3=89LIE > > =C2=AB C'est la goutte qui fait d=C3=A9border l'amphore ! =C2=BB > (Assurancetourix) > > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > --00000000000074f86a05a3a44e72 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Oh so thats why thunderbird broke under my high= winds-omicron-Greg Lyda Inc. account

Thats true, so yes defining it like this could be very d= angerous.

All the big tool= s to download binaries are open source can easily support asking for 64 bit= article numbers (they download by MID anyway, so woudlnt be an issue).=C2= =A0

I agree with what Ju= lien or someone said about adding a LARGEGROUP capability instead of assumi= ng it under Version 3.

<= div class=3D"gmail_quote" dir=3D"auto">
On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 8:41 AM Julien =C3=89LIE <julien@trigofacile.com> wrot= e:
Hi,

> Lets be honest, every newsreader that is going to support 64 bit artic= le
> numbers already has its been more than 10 years. We should do it in a =
> way that allows for new conforming newsreaders while not breaking old = ones.

Pretty easy to test.
Just done with a dummy news server, and Thunderbird Version 68.7.0 (64
bit) released on April 8th, 2020.

By hand:

% telnet localhost 50300
200 Testing server
CAPABILITIES
101 Capability list:
VERSION 2 3
LIST ACTIVE
READER
.
LIST
215 Newsgroups in form "group high low status"
trigofacile.test 9000000000000000000 9000000000000000000 y
.
QUIT




I configure Thunderbird to access this dummy news server.

200 Testing server
MODE READER
200 Reader mode
LIST
215 Newsgroups in form "group high low status"
trigofacile.test 9000000000000000000 9000000000000000000 y
.
GROUP trigofacile.test
211 1 9000000000000000000 9000000000000000000 trigofacile.test

[Thunderbird then just hangs.]


I change article numbers, and retest:

200 Testing server
MODE READER
200 Reader mode
GROUP trigofacile.test
211 1 900 900 trigofacile.test
XOVER 900-900
500 What?
HEAD 900
500 What?

(I have not implemented responses to XOVER and HEAD.=C2=A0 Thunderbird look= s
fine, though, with article number 900.)



Another test:

200 Testing server
MODE READER
200 Reader mode
GROUP trigofacile.test
211 1 2147483648 2147483648 trigofacile.test

[Thunderbird then just hangs.]



And last test:

200 Testing server
MODE READER
200 Reader mode
GROUP trigofacile.test
211 1 2147483647 2147483647 trigofacile.test
XOVER 2147483647-2147483647
500 What?
HEAD 2147483647
500 What?


So, 2^31-1 works fine, but above not.

There is really interoperability problem with current news readers (in
2020), so defining VERSION 3 of NNTP like this is very dangerous.

--
Julien =C3=89LIE

=C2=AB=C2=A0C'est la goutte qui fait d=C3=A9border l'amphore=C2=A0!= =C2=A0=C2=BB
=C2=A0 =C2=A0(Assurancetourix)

_______________________________________________
dispatch mailing list
dispatch@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
--00000000000074f86a05a3a44e72-- From nobody Mon Apr 20 00:07:35 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05D1F3A13AC; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 00:07:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=OMH0etJ/; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Mj3kM0w8 Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CP4mJno5U0Ep; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 00:07:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD3693A12D9; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 00:07:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 840755D2; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 03:07:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 20 Apr 2020 03:07:14 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=E UxadJuiQ3mEd4pmG/QkdnaCrRlc08xR+PSViRv0kBY=; b=OMH0etJ/P0RCVLHCH ujgSz6GthBJeZWjnYjATBL15wiYvjrU5GtqwlF54plnKUy1K1e0Sljz4l9mYRFwV 8N/Xd2jsrJFnhPAkgGi9FXW8einyKKmJCjNVE+Hh1OW240uQM79rY/g0g3H/DP8M ht2/MjwsdodFBP2ev6AUaU4lnQR83WugYwWfnXXdW8ApCtzzelf+zR3n/vhterI+ ax13v1CCVdSCftf/c2yV+gu+UQiQCC4V9QDh8ul3GhooTXo+YGgtJAknOhzFUI0N CxdIGIl1lcpR0lsMW3N7sBkvHMXlIH61BVJ428hRqiVLT4DX2ckn2ALTqnwgjQ5B n4oGg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=EUxadJuiQ3mEd4pmG/QkdnaCrRlc08xR+PSViRv0k BY=; b=Mj3kM0w8SNFcc3Dah6XPDOSIb5rpLPw2QtUS7WtpoZg/lQRrp1jAJhySS u5V5BF90Q+2fj0Fc4kbUDehWoHOBb16/+udv8QiGaWHe03JcYQ7UKCRMX68HGbNf 2TFGAVy22WVuLBAIdNGF80h3lApR1RxITGDvhpZbY/rv3L9Ix387pwMsv6p8+m8M yejK8wYKJ629dPov4li96GWbq9WrhaBR5p1hGD4bsAjgTu9NlYIZEGK20j1y8syD qs9P6ZwyVZZWW2u/s+cD3w+q+zAC8nyik1H8mthY9u2R9YKCsu2xmEWLBsDqZ88I 2oDfNy4Vcp6PZE2lVtOHiwsyRp6qw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrgedvgdduudeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurheptggguffhrfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtddvnecuhfhrohhmpeforghr khcupfhothhtihhnghhhrghmuceomhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuffhomhgrih hnpehivghtfhdrohhrghdpmhhnohhtrdhnvghtnecukfhppeduudelrddujedrudehkedr vdehudenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpe hmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from macbook-air.mnot.net (119-17-158-251.77119e.mel.static.aussiebb.net [119.17.158.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 35CF73065BFB; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 03:07:10 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\)) From: Mark Nottingham X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <8dc45105cca508bc6981e0be2b709508.squirrel@www.rfc-editor.org> Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 17:07:07 +1000 Cc: DISPATCH WG , draft-ucarion-json-type-definition@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <8dc45105cca508bc6981e0be2b709508.squirrel@www.rfc-editor.org> To: ISE X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] Heads up - JSON Data Definition Format (JDDF) X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 07:07:34 -0000 Well, it saw a fairly large amount of discussion on the json@ list -- = albeit under various different names. So I'm a bit surprised it was characterised as not enough enthusiasm in = the community; has that been verified? At the least, a note to json@ would seem reasonable. Cheers, > On 11 Apr 2020, at 8:18 am, RFC ISE (Adrian Farrel) = wrote: >=20 > Hi Dispatch, >=20 > draft-ucarion-json-type-definition has been presented to the = Independent > Submissions Editor for publication as an RFC. >=20 > During review it was suggested to me that the topic might be of = sufficient > interest that a WG could be formed, but there doesn't seem to be quite > that level of enthusiasm. >=20 > In discussing this with the ADs, they suggested I should flag this to = you. > I'd certainly be interested in hearing any comments, and if Dispatch > wanted to take this on that would be worth knowing. >=20 > Thanks, > Adrian > --=20 > Adrian Farrel (ISE), > rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org >=20 > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Mon Apr 20 02:33:47 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABA5B3A08E8; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:33:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BUT8qgY5rACZ; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:33:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D07D53A08E0; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:29:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEC02F406D5; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:29:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5nUW1IdeEbkJ; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.rfc-editor.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EC13F406D1; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:28:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 81.174.202.163 (SquirrelMail authenticated user rfcpise) by www.rfc-editor.org with HTTP; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:28:50 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <8dc45105cca508bc6981e0be2b709508.squirrel@www.rfc-editor.org> Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:28:50 -0700 From: "RFC ISE (Adrian Farrel)" To: "Mark Nottingham" Cc: "ISE" , "DISPATCH WG" , draft-ucarion-json-type-definition@ietf.org Reply-To: rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.21 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] Heads up - JSON Data Definition Format (JDDF) X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 09:33:46 -0000 Thanks Mark, Yes, the document got a fair amount of discussion on the json list back in the day. That, the author acknowledges, did a lot to shape the feature set in the current version of the draft. However, the json working group was closed in 2015. While the mailing list is still active, and this draft has been discussed on that list (even quite recently), I would venture that it is not where one goes in the IETF to determine whether the IETF has consensus to pick up a piece of work. Since this work could belong in the ART Area, Dispatch seems like the right place to catch the attention of the Area's participants, WG chairs, and ADs. This is that attempt to verify whether there is enthusiasm to work on this within the IETF. However, sending email is cheap, so I will drop a note to the json list as well. And, to be clear, I would be very happy if the IETF wanted to pick this up in one way or another (new WG, draft run through Dispatch, AD sponsored, or anything else) Best, Adrian Mark Nottingham wrote: > Well, it saw a fairly large amount of discussion on the json@ list -- > albeit under various different names. > > So I'm a bit surprised it was characterised as not enough enthusiasm > in the community; has that been verified? > > At the least, a note to json@ would seem reasonable. > > Cheers, > > >> On 11 Apr 2020, at 8:18 am, RFC ISE (Adrian Farrel) >> wrote: >> >> Hi Dispatch, >> >> draft-ucarion-json-type-definition has been presented to the >> Independent Submissions Editor for publication as an RFC. >> >> During review it was suggested to me that the topic might be of >> sufficient interest that a WG could be formed, but there doesn't >> seem to be quite that level of enthusiasm. >> >> In discussing this with the ADs, they suggested I should flag this to >> you. >> I'd certainly be interested in hearing any comments, and if Dispatch >> wanted to take this on that would be worth knowing. -- Adrian Farrel (ISE), rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org From nobody Mon Apr 20 12:50:48 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0A7A3A0E41 for ; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 12:50:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.187 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.187 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ducksong.com header.b=PX4sPgqD; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=outbound.mailhop.org header.b=nRNwHzBo Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HbdNrdaNZuzl for ; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 12:50:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from outbound1b.ore.mailhop.org (outbound1b.ore.mailhop.org [54.200.247.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1114F3A0E66 for ; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 12:50:32 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1587412232; cv=none; d=outbound.mailhop.org; s=arc-outbound20181012; b=uKC9msGQrGBGhALmL1GTKoqPCOAVj96r6IJgYrJIrKvSeganKKbY6PieSIU2u6dq3e/kmhrPUt4b9 dI9inkYMVumioPEDVXiKfIPPu28PqeeRrW2/MS0BhCnWF9y3YKJNoYmnUEg+IKedpQvQPtj+BejMQR ETP9O+EVqL693ZEIx/E61Yd6U1uEZyV0KzxSeFqbUE3x47ao3PZJ5isBaIN2ahfCOm+l6rrXQ3rPZV j83R/w35XzsyMj/waWaj7N39jh67Mm9vRm5CexRfXwL/rZbOt/79lF8KJPZfkrHoAzsWofnc51uzIE aoJS3cwPEPAM/98N7ZpklnVZ1A/2gJg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=outbound.mailhop.org; s=arc-outbound20181012; h=content-type:to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:dkim-signature: dkim-signature:from; bh=aLCXJmC/7i6VqHZ/4iCGk2JOhjJRomC5MP+lKcqR2nk=; b=cQqp92px6RrA/2Ei0H+2YOqwcRocbT0FkDSd9pQWzy2ReUVlP3/6z1zZxjLo2JmWCEexsnPaz93X8 CFUHMq2SZuh20DyQskeN59qcVJFP6cEfQFMrdCCjJ8nCi8blF026XClDzwwHg27YWiTkli6KB4pXsk qgAFPL8ZlUqvoQMZDXF3+Dh2WKxUa6DiKYE4yC0tHdGoNleRt1zoZO7vcyQAUf/yRaAfCADSSmAZZ6 7JMf3rELIquNYqziD2jaygL7qT8oAvE64YH80eW7aVLn8LVH5jPRQlkc+MPz8xzRsyY+uq+GNwlAI4 JStKJ7WXknhedx1N+ZaC9QMicHqirvQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; outbound3.ore.mailhop.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ducksong.com smtp.remote-ip=209.85.210.51; dmarc=none header.from=ducksong.com; arc=none header.oldest-pass=0; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ducksong.com; s=duo-1537391512170-ea99bbb3; h=content-type:to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from; bh=aLCXJmC/7i6VqHZ/4iCGk2JOhjJRomC5MP+lKcqR2nk=; b=PX4sPgqDsWmeaIzWynf4SmKtmWv+YbJsH7KUowC6DFbLEFP1dG9w5JW/cEFu0rNuQhRiyuhZjm7gY /vuOVvriM2F/EgX2EnHfrU4IUVLXYUcsMxGGtAKsWDc+GXVSFwogUgPBsX/JJjjbDHKMM8pYqRclD/ HgHGGA/DveGRr9kQ= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=outbound.mailhop.org; s=dkim-high; h=content-type:to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from; bh=aLCXJmC/7i6VqHZ/4iCGk2JOhjJRomC5MP+lKcqR2nk=; b=nRNwHzBoHojkgHSVq+CDw2CfQBZq/RZkxbksUzh68DMFnhLX2r747HrbC4NcuHAn90L77JODoN8Ou p+7E1NoC0OnIqp/0NmDA+aep2iaIOGN7lPOSZW2sZnQV4JSO2M2FM1b/MYCWeXZA04oMyfIg6gUnEv 10zB2FLsl3tqYx6BnvTbDg1lpAPh3tYBZpmMT6uNWlTju4RzGHRLPKnM+0h9ejaR6gbRVfOsZ9b2cK Am4e4RhoI/eMJ6gU/a5aCPQo6iuqeLaie3Fe0YWdMr/GRRx6JNCZCCHyBJWKV2/+yDgSrANdo4fRch n6eFsNbjkSrGFrOh629au+EGEOr6boA== X-MHO-RoutePath: bWNtYW51cw== X-MHO-User: 30584bb8-8340-11ea-b10c-b5956a7dd1a1 X-Report-Abuse-To: https://support.duocircle.com/support/solutions/articles/5000540958-duocircle-standard-smtp-abuse-information X-Originating-IP: 209.85.210.51 X-Mail-Handler: DuoCircle Outbound SMTP Received: from mail-ot1-f51.google.com (mail-ot1-f51.google.com [209.85.210.51]) by outbound3.ore.mailhop.org (Halon) with ESMTPSA id 30584bb8-8340-11ea-b10c-b5956a7dd1a1; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 19:50:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ot1-f51.google.com with SMTP id g14so9230474otg.10 for ; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 12:50:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuY7lJp54nDBLlce8ZUpgJsGPT0pzyhO24vb35XT0oSpJIuH6mSw aIolucRuuAL/EcCXgTU/QOUgsneY0VTkvzZOyBw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIz/43qkKdKPA0Vphr7XuMOhUaMkxfKL55JBpK5QFE7XQkmLFRid1b7m+jAVTeqDfVa7MD2IHnv52m+cacpRo8= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:23a6:: with SMTP id t35mr11698031otb.154.1587412229800; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 12:50:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Patrick McManus Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 15:50:19 -0400 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Dispatch WG Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000011cb1005a3be36b1" Archived-At: Subject: [dispatch] Dispatch Minutes (v1) from IETF 107 X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 19:50:47 -0000 --00000000000011cb1005a3be36b1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" A first revision of the meeting minutes is available. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-107-dispatch/ Corrections and updates are welcome. -Patrick --00000000000011cb1005a3be36b1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
A first revision of the meeting minutes is available.=
ht= tps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-107-dispatch/

=
Corrections and updates are welcome.

-Patrick=


--00000000000011cb1005a3be36b1-- From nobody Tue Apr 21 11:46:35 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2550D3A0407 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 11:46:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.848 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.848 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K3OUbQK-lkMc for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 11:46:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wr1-x432.google.com (mail-wr1-x432.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::432]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC0603A0402 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 11:46:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x432.google.com with SMTP id k11so17798886wrp.5 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 11:46:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=MIq3SnWs9aiKvSVHJHNJ2jz/vmN9i2o0tTjR3F7zNhQ=; b=lvvjjaM0XdzIXwGjLLPITjjOF6ROfdFmCJZ0qHRAb9scwjYbA7fmxnCn4DUW38DE6E eNmbuVsnIjbkdw282BoD0BT1Rt3kQt4h/qP8g1zBO/+we5n3DxjRHoddX+274jkx7gYP UmkqOTQo+XJLM4QZO5ZXyq51TSTMX4ZSkwOD/IwHwcVeOiN/W7kGUHVLGPpWTPFkQ9VN 9ZhpW3pVobi8eK2w3jJPNHbHPdnUycBf6ABErCM522Aecs8p7e3ZLvZJzrlUAgMv36pj X/ZxIdbuwsRzsc92I9Ig6IhkDBotbD1yfdMf9TaAsbAZYW2yE//rBTS+ddRnv31HD+8i OGEQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=MIq3SnWs9aiKvSVHJHNJ2jz/vmN9i2o0tTjR3F7zNhQ=; b=KDVNfYenC8W5ZpCwMhOG65YJCvYaOcpa2u9LnLDDQvvXN9ab74q3ZxbXxofS9RDpag GICv+yzGtCAve/lTYARR6eomjda5rtIhmXbk/b5TKVbDNfN0KG/nzvEblabCYBuwEodm In/NZtqU9dTOTfkFT7j0XrbwTwEiQUlsdJb2rP62ALaHwQL8+TWdZFKXMKOpEZukdlmX rIFODwjPKYgZEV+Eo/TLmxZ75Og82v6PpgGW75GfrEqwEwxvZeROcufvF/ZaQ3RDNlJO 8Gaq9Eu9sKrgUNw37zMa/rQhzT+F0+jCiSFFD6u2xV69LrOTokBPil+DbqP6fXAJ60Me Kh7w== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0Pua7yyslr3VqLRNXeJ1lWNI0/k92h1cfCwKF6E/zm3rQ7S9s+SVS dsNGxiXrFKPf88iazO3j5SuWvYKkzmvCYhKZ4QfieQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLC4s3bvf9vxz/pJluHq4acDdurBxwOgoNEDGtc1xZEOWGkfewMIPuJhquUuSAv3b5bLC+91m3i+0NbnGa1m3E= X-Received: by 2002:adf:e487:: with SMTP id i7mr24959560wrm.393.1587494784414; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 11:46:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: E Sam Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:45:00 -0400 Message-ID: To: DISPATCH WG Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b535fd05a3d16e8e" Archived-At: Subject: [dispatch] NNTP draft - reflection X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 18:46:33 -0000 --000000000000b535fd05a3d16e8e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" After coding up a (possible) nntp 3 implementation, I want to put forth some suggested changes in the draft: Instead of ARTICLE responding with a special code for header only articles, it should respond with the standard 430, 423, or 420 error code. This would allow existing implementations to work smoothly with a header only feed (article not found) STAT should respond with an article does not exist code. What do you think of these changes? It just appeared to me while writing some NNTP stuff that new newsreaders might not recognize the new status codes and thus capability with the existing ones is necessary. With many newsreaders no longer being updated it is important we maintain compatibility. I caught some errata in RFC 3977 but it looks like Julien Elie already reported in '09. Nice! --000000000000b535fd05a3d16e8e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
After coding up a (possible) nntp 3 implementation, I want= to put forth some suggested changes in the draft:

Instead of ARTIC= LE responding with a special code for header only articles, it should respo= nd with the standard 430, 423, or 420 error code. This would allow existing= implementations to work smoothly with a header only feed (article not foun= d)

STAT should respond with an article does not ex= ist code.

What do you think of these changes? It j= ust appeared to me while writing some NNTP stuff that new newsreaders might= not recognize the new status codes and thus capability with the existing o= nes is necessary. With many newsreaders no longer being updated it is impor= tant we maintain compatibility.

I caught some erra= ta=C2=A0 in RFC 3977 but it looks like Julien Elie already reported in '= ;09. Nice!
--000000000000b535fd05a3d16e8e-- From nobody Wed Apr 22 15:37:35 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietf.org Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7DFF3A0B45; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 15:37:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: dispatch@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.127.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dispatch@ietf.org Message-ID: <158759505279.17794.11373270987001647162@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 15:37:32 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [dispatch] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07.txt X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 22:37:33 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Dispatch WG of the IETF. Title : ECMAScript Media Types Updates Authors : Matthew A. Miller Myles Borins Mathias Bynens Bradley Farias Filename : draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07.txt Pages : 27 Date : 2020-04-22 Abstract: This document updates the ECMAScript media types, replacing the existing registrations for "application/javascript" and "text/ javascript" with information and requirements aligned with implementation experiences. This document obsoletes RFC4329, "Scripting Media Types". The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Thu Apr 23 12:24:59 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 626293A1272; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 12:24:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.403 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.403 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.275, MAY_BE_FORGED=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nostrum.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hyIbHSDcMKbc; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 12:24:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DF5C3A1270; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 12:24:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.127.239] (mta-70-120-123-175.stx.rr.com [70.120.123.175] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 03NJOrH0075404 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:24:54 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1587669895; bh=jnm60nJz7DKP3aooOGYC4DmG6OMi4lmZyg2H5KvSVOI=; h=From:Subject:Date:Cc:To; b=YO0dcn7ysAavupRGY6lvH2nnQjkvrMW3Qb8ySlEcg7FF7S8A2/kCwYBqup9+4JUJ4 9BhQDORVqYwmM+jvrk6ifl44pQFcHAS2BOsUHm1J779slYsYgTg4nZdQQ6nWCkmSNJ UTgwWEjuMegps3XygareUzVcrZecikcwAU0YqiUg= X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host mta-70-120-123-175.stx.rr.com [70.120.123.175] (may be forged) claimed to be [192.168.127.239] From: Ben Campbell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\)) Message-Id: Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:24:47 -0500 Cc: dispatch chairs , ART ADs , draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs@ietf.org To: DISPATCH WG X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2) Archived-At: Subject: [dispatch] WGLC of draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07 X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 19:24:58 -0000 Hi, This is a repeat working group last call of = draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs/ The new version has changed quite a bit due to feedback from the first = WGLC, shepherd feedback, and feedback from others. In particular, this = version obsoletes RFC 4329, rather than updating as did the version from = the first WGLC. This WGLC will end on 8 May 20202. Please send feedback to the DISPATCH = list and the authors. And if you review the document and think it=E2=80=99= s ready to go, please say so. Thanks! Ben= From nobody Thu Apr 23 17:54:58 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D89773A0C16; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 17:54:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=PAMJiK/X; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=dDYfS23s Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3CuYLe3RL9KU; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 17:54:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE7CE3A0C1D; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 17:54:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 688BD4B2; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:54:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:54:44 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=u JcnemxDnpSCJ7Aj55MTUgFkQN/wi+vd1C16JYuyTmg=; b=PAMJiK/XGROV5IafE 9iQSIQ2tE35AdnXS+rAdysf37vBNUQxU2DRcZZC0Xx9JQaWL2OplaGk9GWrLUjds XVfN5J/Cc++iNbvE68+S/rnmzBzeVv5yarUnTMheNfVGpjPBbmo2E+ZB4GUywaBS G98CKp8SE3bD2uQeMA64uskZoraOPVnnsO793tp3bj33Y2mfjNhwsRBCGuLjFlZ0 0L/J/TPPS1bG8U3SWf5dITmXXieb4kkBjPDz/wtrnGYnF5EQKSjNoj41NEctCKz4 CDarJx/Mjy3otgQfXsrrrm3e3xECNUaH+T25KTXbNgmdxavUcEqthLzCZbT4dhRv +/ipQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=uJcnemxDnpSCJ7Aj55MTUgFkQN/wi+vd1C16JYuyT mg=; b=dDYfS23sRuHiiIMMRFHbPb/ORgbmK94KUKi5EXZc8uWaxtbYBm1nKb6FT 62b52s0HMoDhAr+WIagqXhYX+rZ0o/It6Acxiny2PnG3BqAkbo9EggSZStNous+v vf66IXDncqHUroDKlBP4ucbQ7J4iu/4tK1t7X42OktBiwbBGM8KOpxbLx4g2EfKs F4PZKrMSgGp3YZ10nAwFaYnUms5rjELCnmamQ2veUaCHDzwBV7/qIPlLLfci3vET QmTsimEYsA1BNRXbKtFBM6/oSJvTWmvKYK0p+7f3qxsPV7YR08ZyA9IhOcC2lf8s AygyDmbqxKkgkNZ8OY+V5LXV62NBA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrhedtgdeflecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtdejnecuhfhrohhmpeforghrkhcu pfhothhtihhnghhhrghmuceomhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpe hivghtfhdrohhrghdpmhhnohhtrdhnvghtnecukfhppeduudelrddujedrudehkedrvdeh udenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmnh hothesmhhnohhtrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from macbook-air.mnot.net (119-17-158-251.77119e.mel.static.aussiebb.net [119.17.158.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 64BC1328005A; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:54:41 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 10:54:31 +1000 Cc: DISPATCH WG , ART ADs , draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs@ietf.org, dispatch chairs Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <43566C44-34E1-4C22-90E1-D0ED6373AD3C@mnot.net> References: To: Ben Campbell X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] WGLC of draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07 X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 00:54:56 -0000 Has this been circulated in TC39? > On 24 Apr 2020, at 5:24 am, Ben Campbell wrote: >=20 > Hi, >=20 > This is a repeat working group last call of = draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07. >=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs/ >=20 > The new version has changed quite a bit due to feedback from the first = WGLC, shepherd feedback, and feedback from others. In particular, this = version obsoletes RFC 4329, rather than updating as did the version from = the first WGLC. >=20 > This WGLC will end on 8 May 20202. Please send feedback to the = DISPATCH list and the authors. And if you review the document and think = it=E2=80=99s ready to go, please say so. >=20 > Thanks! >=20 > Ben > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Thu Apr 23 17:56:52 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1B693A0C3A for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 17:56:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -17.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WKC80GIkg3xk for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 17:56:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ot1-x32a.google.com (mail-ot1-x32a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2A2C3A0C2D for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 17:56:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x32a.google.com with SMTP id e26so9650033otr.2 for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 17:56:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=V35eowSEnObMBNNmkE/4+z8m7yv1ktIxnmcix2pBXJU=; b=JWtpfcu4E7uXn9glN/cZ0udFCFDtm7Jsy18A0FQ4b+/9QPnrV4GOA5Qg8TDIhyT62S JjIj5NV1QEp98q+AWzHTDVogsLSA3Ka/z9kMxzZQfWXyUXIOXSrarbMqO2ayv17INzys 9RuB7Q8tdv40+etmLLxftfLDs+zMuAp7JYB/f7Vkf9XSMA90jyASYTLhJUkFgew+N63P rSYMwSBBLtkO9uIXJh8NmaNdhr12IkCPm5XxfBGlWtpt5tFbFbiVHi62G/oAmyAPX3Uk 2AN4Av9EXONUI/l1jVK4bETOPKUOXCkR4byu3G8oRmZAzVxJx5FjtE+LmlHw09WeXtUH kVoQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=V35eowSEnObMBNNmkE/4+z8m7yv1ktIxnmcix2pBXJU=; b=nD6ZNu+vAW60p2iOECs2U5qDqjZmAWvFmfouSeNt6daWoaR4/WkyE9sS8pzNIPT1EL pTtE0a4ifmr4DAg74RebfCE/Z7xbG49L0nR4tkiqN/7LpTsyIgZ1j+9XgPxIW6Wm2HIU ClQ9972yuHWowoGQhMa0CuTXAuJkIEptU+EMssGVSq64ROyuYx2m5J39elttJOQB+vwb ioX3CY/RoxRBhbtQhQs/YXG7WPrpuy06IiJdaU9FnrSDJvTQ4vF3EaXW6s47DPTtFIlw KNL9epLJcqunPKWJCYgd6S26IvA8NeT84312vmyRyPH4l+Y7agTXaNvEVQnP1E8obhP1 /Rkw== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0Pub+g5TXJ7UX98SSJxR5TKdGLXAkPk1nRLthYZzaJrphg+z/NXfh tnCoajMcrdjyizAuRrMvjNDhApB7nPCJbZXUa51dyQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypI6Fcb1DFOfYp/gVbF6gWksB+eXVezNI8ouP5SaSIVk6eT8GTRfdi2uzdx5hadX/ROkan60Dr84DR3Akq77JZY= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:364b:: with SMTP id w69mr5717686otb.289.1587689801673; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 17:56:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <43566C44-34E1-4C22-90E1-D0ED6373AD3C@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: <43566C44-34E1-4C22-90E1-D0ED6373AD3C@mnot.net> From: Myles Borins Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:56:30 -0400 Message-ID: To: Mark Nottingham Cc: Ben Campbell , DISPATCH WG , ART ADs , draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs@ietf.org, dispatch chairs Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a4d97f05a3fed6dc" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] WGLC of draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07 X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 00:56:50 -0000 --000000000000a4d97f05a3fed6dc Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The committee is aware of it but it might not be a bad idea to give another fyi Fwiw myself and Mathias, two of the authors, are active google delegated. Yulia, who was one of the Mozilla reviewers, is also an active TC39 rep. On Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 8:54 PM Mark Nottingham wrote: > Has this been circulated in TC39? > > > > On 24 Apr 2020, at 5:24 am, Ben Campbell wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > This is a repeat working group last call of > draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07. > > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs/ > > > > The new version has changed quite a bit due to feedback from the first > WGLC, shepherd feedback, and feedback from others. In particular, this > version obsoletes RFC 4329, rather than updating as did the version from > the first WGLC. > > > > This WGLC will end on 8 May 20202. Please send feedback to the DISPATCH > list and the authors. And if you review the document and think it=E2=80= =99s ready > to go, please say so. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Ben > > _______________________________________________ > > dispatch mailing list > > dispatch@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > --000000000000a4d97f05a3fed6dc Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The committee is aware of it but it might not be a bad id= ea to give another fyi=C2=A0

F= wiw myself and Mathias, two of the authors, are active google delegated. Yu= lia, who was one of the Mozilla reviewers, is also an active TC39 rep.

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 8:54 PM Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
Has this been circulated in TC39?


> On 24 Apr 2020, at 5:24 am, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> wrot= e:
>
> Hi,
>
> This is a repeat working group last call of draft-ietf-dispatch-javasc= ript-mjs-07.
>
> https://datatrac= ker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs/
>
> The new version has changed quite a bit due to feedback from the first= WGLC, shepherd feedback, and feedback from others. In particular, this ver= sion obsoletes RFC 4329, rather than updating as did the version from the f= irst WGLC.
>
> This WGLC will end on 8 May 20202. Please send feedback to the DISPATC= H list and the authors. And if you review the document and think it=E2=80= =99s ready to go, please say so.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ben
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> dispatch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/= dispatch

--
Mark Nottingham=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.mnot.net/

--000000000000a4d97f05a3fed6dc-- From nobody Thu Apr 23 19:48:17 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65C2A3A0E44; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 19:48:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1LqEW6zVT1KT; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 19:48:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A54F33A0E36; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 19:47:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2209DAA108EB; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 21:47:47 -0500 (CDT) Received: from episteme.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (episteme.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aUAK8ni_ftac; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 21:47:45 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [172.16.1.18] (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6D8FFAA108DB; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 21:47:45 -0500 (CDT) From: "Pete Resnick" To: "Ben Campbell" Cc: "DISPATCH WG" , "dispatch chairs" , "ART ADs" , draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs@ietf.org Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 21:47:20 -0500 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5683) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed; markup=markdown Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] WGLC of draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07 X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 02:48:14 -0000 FYI: I took a peek at this to see about i18ndir review, but almost all of the i18n stuff looks unchanged from 4329, so unless you want to get started early, I'll leave it for a Last Call review. pr On 23 Apr 2020, at 14:24, Ben Campbell wrote: > Hi, > > This is a repeat working group last call of > draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07. > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs/ > > The new version has changed quite a bit due to feedback from the first > WGLC, shepherd feedback, and feedback from others. In particular, this > version obsoletes RFC 4329, rather than updating as did the version > from the first WGLC. > > This WGLC will end on 8 May 20202. Please send feedback to the > DISPATCH list and the authors. And if you review the document and > think it’s ready to go, please say so. > > Thanks! > > Ben -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best From nobody Thu Apr 23 19:53:52 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43D783A0E5A; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 19:53:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.403 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.403 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.275, MAY_BE_FORGED=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nostrum.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OduS4w0yA9VN; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 19:53:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F07D3A0E56; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 19:53:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.127.239] (mta-70-120-123-175.stx.rr.com [70.120.123.175] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 03O2rCpo054928 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 23 Apr 2020 21:53:13 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1587696794; bh=YXZ1gYBbYkS2UkK2ntpZls/VvS1ipdjCjEMX2dVQFd4=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=ZjFzniEwxP5syCsuqDdYI7qcZpb3dTKSFTDQbAP5b8UU2t+7desiRJDtbBdrAqUUK qVdkRS76i3Xo95l+nf4TKx0P3Kj5DVJg0AMgLgeRl6qHIig/OTMqSZJgvdyE6/fDuh CQQ1qjjoiW/ilQNyRUCT7qbc2J+4OKjodLFIx69k= X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host mta-70-120-123-175.stx.rr.com [70.120.123.175] (may be forged) claimed to be [192.168.127.239] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\)) From: Ben Campbell In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 21:53:06 -0500 Cc: DISPATCH WG , dispatch chairs , ART ADs , draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9E74CB63-C20F-474A-A061-28FE04C1ED3C@nostrum.com> References: To: Pete Resnick X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] WGLC of draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07 X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 02:53:28 -0000 > On Apr 23, 2020, at 9:47 PM, Pete Resnick = wrote: >=20 > FYI: I took a peek at this to see about i18ndir review, but almost all = of the i18n stuff looks unchanged from 4329, so unless you want to get = started early, I'll leave it for a Last Call review. I assume you mean =E2=80=9Cleave it for an IETF Last Call review=E2=80=9D?= I don=E2=80=99t see a reason to wait, unless you care concerned that = WGLC feedback will moot such a review. As a 2nd WGLC, I normally = wouldn=E2=80=99t expect too many changes, but given the restructuring, I = could be mistaken. Ben. >=20 > pr >=20 > On 23 Apr 2020, at 14:24, Ben Campbell wrote: >=20 >> Hi, >>=20 >> This is a repeat working group last call of = draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07. >>=20 >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs/ >>=20 >> The new version has changed quite a bit due to feedback from the = first WGLC, shepherd feedback, and feedback from others. In particular, = this version obsoletes RFC 4329, rather than updating as did the version = from the first WGLC. >>=20 >> This WGLC will end on 8 May 20202. Please send feedback to the = DISPATCH list and the authors. And if you review the document and think = it=E2=80=99s ready to go, please say so. >>=20 >> Thanks! >>=20 >> Ben >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ > All connections to the world are tenuous at best From nobody Thu Apr 23 20:27:34 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B4783A0ECF; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:27:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 59G4L9znfiY4; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:27:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CABF3A0ED0; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:27:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9620AA117DC; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 22:27:24 -0500 (CDT) Received: from episteme.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (episteme.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T3AjTL2MJLSt; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 22:27:22 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [172.16.1.18] (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EEE7BAA117CF; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 22:27:21 -0500 (CDT) From: "Pete Resnick" To: "Ben Campbell" Cc: "DISPATCH WG" , "dispatch chairs" , "ART ADs" , draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs@ietf.org Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 22:27:21 -0500 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5683) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <9E74CB63-C20F-474A-A061-28FE04C1ED3C@nostrum.com> References: <9E74CB63-C20F-474A-A061-28FE04C1ED3C@nostrum.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed; markup=markdown Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] WGLC of draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07 X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 03:27:33 -0000 On 23 Apr 2020, at 21:53, Ben Campbell wrote: >> On Apr 23, 2020, at 9:47 PM, Pete Resnick >> wrote: >> >> FYI: I took a peek at this to see about i18ndir review, but almost >> all of the i18n stuff looks unchanged from 4329, so unless you want >> to get started early, I'll leave it for a Last Call review. > > I assume you mean “leave it for an IETF Last Call review”? Yep. > I don’t see a reason to wait, unless you care concerned that WGLC > feedback will moot such a review. As a 2nd WGLC, I normally wouldn’t > expect too many changes, but given the restructuring, I could be > mistaken. I can go ahead and assign it now. Makes no big difference. I'll just mention to the reviewer not to Cc last-call. pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best From nobody Thu Apr 23 20:29:31 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79C7E3A0EF4; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:29:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.403 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.403 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.275, MAY_BE_FORGED=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nostrum.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WtMhmwJ5EGl4; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:29:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1413F3A0EEF; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:29:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.127.239] (mta-70-120-123-175.stx.rr.com [70.120.123.175] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 03O3TBIo061312 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 23 Apr 2020 22:29:12 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1587698953; bh=FIz3+Y78Kzt7QDBFe5sayzqE6mqhFFA3IaFHEjQV32A=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=st69fA2/hmiWbnvsM/HCF0ZrUwVMoIOJ0G6ilbhP11P8P8gkN343zKQHjCFTyGONt bG993tbNmk9bubpiTUBuZqyyHTAh1dzV58Cqz6v/fCPL/8jNERWJgchS+y+a1nfw3K w+Jod5CzM1cccNiKGNfgddIcS/0URoyd6cfeEhoU= X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host mta-70-120-123-175.stx.rr.com [70.120.123.175] (may be forged) claimed to be [192.168.127.239] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\)) From: Ben Campbell In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 22:29:06 -0500 Cc: DISPATCH WG , dispatch chairs , ART ADs , draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <2E6436F8-C514-4B9F-BB44-52378EA80D7F@nostrum.com> References: <9E74CB63-C20F-474A-A061-28FE04C1ED3C@nostrum.com> To: Pete Resnick X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] WGLC of draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07 X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 03:29:29 -0000 > On Apr 23, 2020, at 10:27 PM, Pete Resnick = wrote: >=20 > On 23 Apr 2020, at 21:53, Ben Campbell wrote: >=20 >>> On Apr 23, 2020, at 9:47 PM, Pete Resnick = wrote: >>>=20 >>> FYI: I took a peek at this to see about i18ndir review, but almost = all of the i18n stuff looks unchanged from 4329, so unless you want to = get started early, I'll leave it for a Last Call review. >>=20 >> I assume you mean =E2=80=9Cleave it for an IETF Last Call review=E2=80=9D= ? >=20 > Yep. >=20 >> I don=E2=80=99t see a reason to wait, unless you care concerned that = WGLC feedback will moot such a review. As a 2nd WGLC, I normally = wouldn=E2=80=99t expect too many changes, but given the restructuring, I = could be mistaken. >=20 > I can go ahead and assign it now. Makes no big difference. I'll just = mention to the reviewer not to Cc last-call. Ah, I see, you mean assigning a review to someone else :-) Normal = process is fine; I don=E2=80=99t think we have a particular need for an = early review. (But we wouldn=E2=80=99t turn one away if it happened.)=20 >=20 > pr > --=20 > Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ > All connections to the world are tenuous at best From nobody Thu Apr 23 20:34:50 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5DEF3A0F0B; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:34:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.217 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.217 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.82, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QjRC4mrFj7pC; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:34:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io1-f52.google.com (mail-io1-f52.google.com [209.85.166.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5E983A0F09; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:34:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-f52.google.com with SMTP id f19so8929330iog.5; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:34:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QUUGliLxybhr5SFC8TgTmmtDUanMn+N7+pYwSPBZmrQ=; b=HPqYc1iL3gw7xYde7uTxmOdrQ+ADaYb9VUuJxGc45eaeoMHTfiLE2KOV+1LZ0Qe0hw jfa3lq4PWYUXwdcT7cx7KTK1vio+Y5lKClEUkYmnp83+dgw0Q0JhYZRyeGX7QACTFwZ8 UDCWBmo3FpfyFd8LCh5f5qdtpz5NeVZkhUHY6X7+mgi2TGgvm9oDS/05UVwT7xott2rh ktLQvcRJXx1WiE4BhDCNDCn86btIyLKETUXDtYVffSXmiX4aWklqGOprOhm3GdpgXLjC Oj9SkeO98QliSpsyy1GgKhqEJw0p9on1oJtYt+YllUrjYUEAGn0KcFXZVABVEm15161+ ROSA== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZGY4K8FWSTGkYDpIbFqkEOBlDyz8z6i7vNy143DlQd15e66MIr f154Lup16fW0VrUAGODeMTcYoYDujx3q/VEXQI3CyrnT X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLO3JIPAoQP4bka1oRoad9n6pXK44Zy+RdJOdnVHaauimWRt4LYiQNSu1S++WOYBq22nx7CHfhghMRpnHPWDPU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6602:1695:: with SMTP id s21mr6970093iow.40.1587699283023; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 20:34:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9E74CB63-C20F-474A-A061-28FE04C1ED3C@nostrum.com> <2E6436F8-C514-4B9F-BB44-52378EA80D7F@nostrum.com> In-Reply-To: <2E6436F8-C514-4B9F-BB44-52378EA80D7F@nostrum.com> From: Barry Leiba Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 23:34:32 -0400 Message-ID: To: Ben Campbell Cc: ART ADs , DISPATCH WG , Pete Resnick , dispatch chairs , draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c65bdc05a4010b15" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] WGLC of draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07 X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 03:34:49 -0000 --000000000000c65bdc05a4010b15 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Better to get a review earlier, so there=E2=80=99s a backup if it doesn=E2= =80=99t get done. b On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 11:29 PM Ben Campbell wrote: > > > > On Apr 23, 2020, at 10:27 PM, Pete Resnick wrote= : > > > > On 23 Apr 2020, at 21:53, Ben Campbell wrote: > > > >>> On Apr 23, 2020, at 9:47 PM, Pete Resnick > wrote: > >>> > >>> FYI: I took a peek at this to see about i18ndir review, but almost al= l > of the i18n stuff looks unchanged from 4329, so unless you want to get > started early, I'll leave it for a Last Call review. > >> > >> I assume you mean =E2=80=9Cleave it for an IETF Last Call review=E2=80= =9D? > > > > Yep. > > > >> I don=E2=80=99t see a reason to wait, unless you care concerned that W= GLC > feedback will moot such a review. As a 2nd WGLC, I normally wouldn=E2=80= =99t expect > too many changes, but given the restructuring, I could be mistaken. > > > > I can go ahead and assign it now. Makes no big difference. I'll just > mention to the reviewer not to Cc last-call. > > Ah, I see, you mean assigning a review to someone else :-) Normal process > is fine; I don=E2=80=99t think we have a particular need for an early rev= iew. (But > we wouldn=E2=80=99t turn one away if it happened.) > > > > > pr > > -- > > Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ > > All connections to the world are tenuous at best > > --000000000000c65bdc05a4010b15 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Better to get a review earlier, so there=E2=80=99s a= backup if it doesn=E2=80=99t get done.

b

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 11:29 PM Ben Campbell= <ben@nostrum.com> wrote:
<= /div>


> On Apr 23, 2020, at 10:27 PM, Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net> wrote:
>
> On 23 Apr 2020, at 21:53, Ben Campbell wrote:
>
>>> On Apr 23, 2020, at 9:47 PM, Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net> wrot= e:
>>>
>>> FYI: I took a peek at this to see about i18ndir review, but al= most all of the i18n stuff looks unchanged from 4329, so unless you want to= get started early, I'll leave it for a Last Call review.
>>
>> I assume you mean =E2=80=9Cleave it for an IETF Last Call review= =E2=80=9D?
>
> Yep.
>
>> I don=E2=80=99t see a reason to wait, unless you care concerned th= at WGLC feedback will moot such a review. As a 2nd WGLC, I normally wouldn= =E2=80=99t expect too many changes, but given the restructuring, I could be= mistaken.
>
> I can go ahead and assign it now. Makes no big difference. I'll ju= st mention to the reviewer not to Cc last-call.

Ah, I see, you mean assigning a review to someone else :-) Normal process i= s fine; I don=E2=80=99t think we have a particular need for an early review= . (But we wouldn=E2=80=99t turn one away if it happened.)

>
> pr
> --
> Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
> All connections to the world are tenuous at best

--000000000000c65bdc05a4010b15-- From nobody Fri Apr 24 07:43:51 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9F863A0882 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 07:43:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s4Xkcg119J3a for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 07:43:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ua1-x92e.google.com (mail-ua1-x92e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::92e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 518A63A088F for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 07:43:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ua1-x92e.google.com with SMTP id y10so9673384uao.8 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 07:43:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=l3VW2WAI8LmpSUXprpQ+NLrJS3BGIFLXmf5owYLpGIk=; b=fv/QENhu4IYuBZCaeLZJPqhgGgSk3pP7iaSlIDKNXKUnU50bBdTm5HXW2ChXR6nECo VtlLZeoZHAVELUD6cRm3oTK217cuYXroOjxg/NaR3jQxHwD8kzHqu781LFzKYua6iG2A O35zFrQW/eZZMZiVYA1tnoIrvD6LvQkEsD1qIOdwokI8GfgUxrqrDH5I6QWT+gNFxmk4 /etFYvUZja2DlX/nzVu49+akojTzabnTr4QW49QgJfwWxr7dK+QGwO+t9TcjXM9Gd9HG NWBGGrWOted3LCgd/qwsKSwWhuzMI3BzkRV1lABPrAJdKmf3nJhv4KVvHYoh5rmWWKGW aL5Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=l3VW2WAI8LmpSUXprpQ+NLrJS3BGIFLXmf5owYLpGIk=; b=Gy9076DNY3Y3ns/ywhgeqNJo7XdBBAXvMFYqs9cjHbYE9clhYD58C5DvghW4WgNAyj H4rW+87lViazPXyjdaxp329VZzgi+H+MHSwhcz1LTFt5SaHxLTVMVDrNGFh/R+5qKCBd w23KpPYahn/jrp7gN1NpfqWd9twd6QwZzmoBzrUApoReoW+W3eY3IPT+QdEgu0eKJXIm P3HGaARGUMshJPEOE3lhY5YCmXJ8PfNVTr4jB1P6YyR2URFjsbXTAEsEW2lQgC4KJuxB vMQr4HdekbYqSWOFhGUz/HJEqhpRg6c7wwp3kC3Tonff/AnCOzjAUz8osAKP4vD98tb+ EALg== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYe+ZkzBMTBmBf8lnAVCMFx8+/ZuqzAgbS9Mmli2zCCGHcg5NcL 0pL9/MAoA/n5gRb4PH/G/8C3hcoGB/7D9o4UGMmRS2FA X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIrnB2mUPTYwU30BDC4iDvn1+wOH2/ij/ivs/spSztRDmWmjY3NmMFNu/Yab/d61oT9wRfET65/S70kRWtkcFE= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:4503:: with SMTP id r3mr7658865uar.101.1587739423847; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 07:43:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 07:43:33 -0700 Message-ID: To: DISPATCH list Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005abe1d05a40a643e" Archived-At: Subject: [dispatch] ASAP charter revision X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 14:43:48 -0000 --0000000000005abe1d05a40a643e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" For those not aware, the proposed charter for ASAP went to the IESG this morning for first review. I was prescient enough to add the DISPATCH chairs to the mailings before this happened so they're kept current on the discussion, but silly enough not to also add the main proponents, so they were not. The summary can be found under the IESG Review tab here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-asap/ There's one blocking comment and enough general feedback that we should probably do a round of edits addressing everything. We can do that in this thread on the list or do it off-list, at the chairs' discretion. Once that's done, we can send the charter out for general review. -MSK --0000000000005abe1d05a40a643e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
For those not aware, the proposed charter for AS= AP went to the IESG this morning for first review.=C2=A0 I was prescient en= ough to add the DISPATCH chairs to the mailings before this happened so the= y're kept current on the discussion, but silly enough not to also add t= he main proponents, so they were not.

The summary can be found= under the IESG Review tab here:

https://datatracker.ietf.org= /doc/charter-ietf-asap/

There's one blocking comm= ent and enough general feedback that we should probably do a round of edits= addressing everything.=C2=A0 We can do that in this thread on the list or = do it off-list, at the chairs' discretion.=C2=A0 Once that's done, = we can send the charter out for general review.

-MSK
--0000000000005abe1d05a40a643e-- From nobody Wed Apr 29 22:30:24 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AC093A040B for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 22:30:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pIgVxck2A7-E for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 22:30:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vk1-xa32.google.com (mail-vk1-xa32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E78603A0408 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 22:30:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vk1-xa32.google.com with SMTP id d6so1376407vko.4 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 22:30:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Vaoi8mYoc1chfFA9mUaPSofseszt8/+AbgkpdpeMQBo=; b=I77gKWfK4pZx6BSIW7wfny1NcF8YwVMu2+fvRogojijESkGHD6XwC/2Uh7TpCHTaDr ilXTv6T9kdsFmf6lcWMZQBZ/3sVr6Vkcoaz5BsFGKEDyAvXhxv81rJe9kBP7c+oeHesT 2GzQEptmt4aoGUxI1NOwjTgP5/taeLWipZkFb+xmo5LE59Hu92D057ErQBYXQWMgM7P/ fjEQ3kmS3AdlTQsbJH9kxyUCAabICeDWR6tzt2YmuMm6pYKH2W9pXsC1n0slawkNkY1K upQCIu6SoBdfgDeHHs+7I8Q2JwzTlWNvxFdwuhXCwhed+37b4+LTHPysSmDOycyzkARe luKw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Vaoi8mYoc1chfFA9mUaPSofseszt8/+AbgkpdpeMQBo=; b=qsEzkiw9idApu0U8ynvO6axs6aPAHhmMLJNjV89DLV3sm3lRzWMDl4XGY1/fWmnYZF J/SaaUqhTVJq+UPwRxYqbx/p60DFz8L/hD6wN8QiYmk+owLkpCrEEKWxDhtamRPrLdl9 pxPdiHle6ZaZO05bkiysPw+j2giF6mH1OD3cSRdtuNOUIb+DSN9/U/zsyf54q4P8DkPx zcNKQUiBHoV7g2zWr1GoZdB51ZycpTtBIiLAaTHJ9e8NNWR7CK1cOtF+kEPHeO1tlRfe VfdezQiqzGB+5fIUJOoS20WanfeKGrtAdIFqAHzYxR6vRoDIznSi07PFrZfi1LbYSfoX axNQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZ8gDSgXS92AGPTCzXIDlxcTKq+tN+uBuk/RxTerATx2PSx8Hdv lo0X/5+NQPw5qh/Uj61BRUxXy0bAcIerGHX5QOiD2LVL X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJqSOm4w3lelf05yPw7oP0P2JAipiInZv+bmQAesR52hfAzNKCHtebGxCnv+Y642+2yxW1lryxZCL1OHtnlehI= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:2c8e:: with SMTP id s136mr1225150vks.60.1588224619495; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 22:30:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87tv3a9hjo.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> <2b167f97-b380-2701-d1fd-e6f72d15f9a3@peabody.io> In-Reply-To: <2b167f97-b380-2701-d1fd-e6f72d15f9a3@peabody.io> From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 22:30:07 -0700 Message-ID: To: Brad Peabody Cc: DISPATCH list Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000044c5e805a47b5c99" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] UUID Version 6 Proposal X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 05:30:23 -0000 --00000000000044c5e805a47b5c99 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 11:54 AM Brad Peabody wrote: > Thanks Dale. This first draft was intended to clearly outline the > problem, since the initial feedback I received on this idea from general > mailing list could be summarized as "why do we need this". > > I agree with your point though, it needs more detail. I will make it my > next step on this to outline the specific fields. Even if I refer to > RFC 4122 I think summarizing what goes where in this document makes good > sense. > Is a new version of this planned based on the feedback received? As for process: This came up in the ART area of IETF 107, not DISPATCH, so it was up for area-wide interest discussion but no specific action yet. I'd like to see what response there is to a revision. -MSK --00000000000044c5e805a47b5c99 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 11:54 AM Brad Peab= ody <brad@peabody.io> wrote:
Thanks Dale.=C2=A0 This first draft was intended to clearly outl= ine the
problem, since the initial feedback I received on this idea from general mailing list could be summarized as "why do we need this".

I agree with your point though, it needs more detail.=C2=A0 I will make it = my
next step on this to outline the specific fields.=C2=A0 Even if I refer to =
RFC 4122 I think summarizing what goes where in this document makes good sense.

Is a new version of this planned= based on the feedback received?

As for process: This cam= e up in the ART area of IETF 107, not DISPATCH, so it was up for area-wide = interest discussion but no specific action yet.=C2=A0 I'd like to see w= hat response there is to a revision.

-MSK
--00000000000044c5e805a47b5c99--