From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Fri Dec 1 19:34:59 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id TAA14848 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 19:34:58 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA05746 for ietf-fax-bks; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 16:05:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA05741 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 16:05:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA08391; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 19:06:56 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200012020006.TAA08391@ietf.org> To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: ietf-fax@imc.org From: The IESG SUBJECT: Last Call: File Format for Internet Fax to Draft Standard Reply-to: iesg@ietf.org Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 19:06:56 -0500 Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: The IESG has received a request from the Internet Fax Working Group to consider File Format for Internet Fax as a Draft Standard, obsoleting RFC 2301. The IESG will also consider publication of Tag Image File Format (TIFF) - image/tiff MIME Sub-type Registration as a Best Current Practices RFC, obsoleting RFC2302. The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by January 2, 2001. Files can be obtained via http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-09.txt http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-fax-tiff-regbis-02.txt Implementation report for File Format for Internet Fax can be found at http://www.ietf.org/IESG/Implementations/TIFF-FAX-implementation.txt From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Mon Dec 4 01:04:04 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id BAA15058 for ; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 01:04:03 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA19414 for ietf-fax-bks; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 21:26:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp (ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp [202.32.12.1]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA19410 for ; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 21:26:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from thunder.ricoh.co.jp (thunder [133.139.211.198]) by ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W) with ESMTP id OAA25394; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:28:25 +0900 (JST) Received: from newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp (newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp [133.139.60.10]) by thunder.ricoh.co.jp (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W) with SMTP id OAA07222; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:28:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (maple.toda.ricoh.co.jp [133.139.60.73]) by newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp (8.6.11+2.4W/3.3W9-1.0S8sun) with ESMTP id OAA00189; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:28:17 +0900 To: GK@dial.pipex.com Cc: ietf-fax@imc.org Subject: draft-ietf-fax-timely-delivery-01.txt X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.2 on Emacs 20.4 / Mule 4.1 (AOI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20001204143251Z.tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp> Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 14:32:51 +0900 (JST) From: Hiroshi Tamura X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140) Lines: 43 Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Personal comments. There are mainly two pending issues, I think. Section 4 "Compliance-required ESMTP extension" and Section 5 "DSN extension". The Key issue is Compliance-required(section 4). If my undestanding is correct, this must be dealt with UA like POP/IMAP4 device. If so, how about considering the time interval by POP/IMAP4 device? If the thing that comforms to timely delivery is a POP/IMAP4 device and I-fax device, is it possible to recommend the short interval time? Specific value is difficult to define, but, I think the value for guidance can be described like Section 3.4(Timely confirmation). If it is the I-fax device(not PC mailer software), it runs 24-hours. It may be feasible. This is just at idea level. The next is DSN extension(section 5). Yes, it would be better to have the extension. But, we can use the existing definitions. There are "delayed" action-value with status code 4.4.7 and "failed" with 5.4.7, which are written in section 4.1.3 of RFC2852. There are other dscriptions. Am I out of the stories? Also, how about separating requirement parts and guidance parts? For example, Section 3.4(Timely confirmation) is for guidance. Minimum requirements should be decided, but, it is no problems that the rests are guidances or implementation issues, I think. Because, there are some items that are difficult to solve completely. I hope it helps you. Regards, -- Hiroshi Tamura, Ricoh Company, LTD. E-mail: tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Mon Dec 4 04:57:06 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id EAA11949 for ; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 04:57:06 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA19236 for ietf-fax-bks; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 01:22:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.vlgm.unicel.ru ([194.186.245.36]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA19213 for ; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 01:22:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.mindspring.com by vlgm.unicel.ru with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.4.R) for ; Sat, 02 Dec 2000 19:55:14 +0300 From: To: Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 08:15:03 Message-Id: <625.768690.200783@mail.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: ietf-fax@imc.org X-Return-Path: ASDASDAASD@pop3.trip.com.br Reply-To: ASDASDAASD@pop3.trip.com.br Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit GET YOUR OWN 100 MEG WEBSITE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH TODAY! STOP PAYING $19.95 or more TODAY for your web site, WHEN YOU CAN GET ONE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH! DO YOU ALREADY HAVE A WEBSITE? ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TRANSFER THE DOMAIN TO OUR SERVERS AND UPLOAD YOUR DATA AND YOU ARE READY TO GO! YOUR NEW WEB SPACE CAN BE CREATED INSTANTLY WITH JUST A SIMPLE PHONE CALL TO OUR OFFICE. YOU CAN CHANGE THE DESIGN OF YOUR SITE AS MUCH AS YOU WANT with no extra charge! UNLIMITED TRAFFIC -- no extra charge! FRONT PAGE EXTENSIONS are FULLY SUPPORTED. A SET UP FEE OF $40.00 APPLIES for FIRST TIME CUSTOMERS. ALL FEES PREPAID IN ADVANCE FOR THE YEAR PLUS A $40.00 SET UP CHARGE. FOR DETAILS CALL 1 888 248 0765 if you are outside the USA, please fax 240 337 8325 Webhosting International From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Tue Dec 5 08:28:16 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id IAA13799 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 08:28:16 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id EAA09113 for ietf-fax-bks; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 04:37:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail3.registeredsite.com (IDENT:root@mail3.registeredsite.com [209.35.159.14]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA09108 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 04:36:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.sharppage.com (mail.sharppage.com [216.247.135.231]) by mail3.registeredsite.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA09110 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 07:36:33 -0500 Received: from localhost [65.24.177.135] by mail.sharppage.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.00) id A1E825630134; Tue, 05 Dec 2000 07:39:04 -0500 X-Sender: sales@sharppage.com From: SharpPage Web Design Studio To: ietf-fax@imc.org Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 07:41:43 -0500 Subject: SharpPage Web Design Studio Reply-To: sales@sharppage.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001__62771865_27703.48" Message-Id: <200012050739718.SM00415@localhost> Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: This is a Multipart MIME message. ------=_NextPart_000_001__62771865_27703.48 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ------=_NextPart_000_001__62771865_27703.48 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PCFET0NUWVBFIEhUTUwgUFVCTElDICItLy9XM0MvL0RURCBIVE1MIDQuMCBUcmFuc2l0aW9u YWwvL0VOIj4NCg0KPGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCgkNCjx0aXRsZT5TaGFycFBhZ2UgLSBXZWIg RGVzaWduIFNlcnZpY2VzPC90aXRsZT4NCgkNCjxtZXRhIG5hbWU9ImRlc2NyaXB0aW9uIiBj b250ZW50PSJTaGFycFBhZ2Ugd2ViIGRlc2lnbiBpcyBhIGZ1bGwgc2VydmljZSB3ZWIgZGVz aWduIGNvbXBhbnkuIFRoZSBlbmQgcmVzdWx0IG9mIG91ciB3b3JrIHdpbGwgYmUgYSBzaXRl IHRoYXQgaXMgaW52aXRpbmcgYW5kIGluZm9ybWF0aXZlIGFuZCB3aWxsIGNhcHR1cmUgeW91 ciBhdWRpZW5jZSdzIGV5ZS4iPg0KPG1ldGEgbmFtZT0ia2V5d29yZHMiIGNvbnRlbnQ9Indl YiBkZXNpZ24sIGNvcnBvcmF0ZSBob3VzaW5nLCBzZWFyY2ggZW5naW5lIHRpcHMsIHNpdGUg ZGV2ZWxvcG1lbnQsIGludGVybmV0LCBjb3Jwb3JhdGUgaG91c2luZyB3ZWIgZGVzaWduLCBl bXBsb3ltZW50LCBjdXN0b20gd2ViIGRlc2lnbiwgd2VibWFzdGVyaW5nLCB3ZWJzZWl0ZSwg d2VibWFzdGVyLCBkZXNpZ24sIHdlYmRlc2lnbiwgbWFya2V0aW5nLCBncmFwaGljcywgd2Vi IHByb21vdGlvbnMsIHN1Ym1pc3Npb25zLCB3b3JsZHdpZGUsIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLCB0ZW1w b3JhcnkgaG91c2luZywgY29ycG9yYXRlIGhvdXNpbmcgTG9zIEFuZ2VsZXMsIHdvcmxkIHdp ZGUgd2ViLCBkZXNpZ24sIG5ld3MsIHdlYiBkZXNpZ24iPg0KDQoJDQoNCjxzY3JpcHQgbGFu Z3VhZ2U9IkphdmFTY3JpcHQiPg0KPCEtLSBoaWRlIHRoaXMgc2NyaXB0IGZyb20gbm9uLWph dmFzY3JpcHQtZW5hYmxlZCBicm93c2Vycw0KDQppZiAoZG9jdW1lbnQuaW1hZ2VzKSB7DQpu ZXdtZW51NF9yMl9jMDFfRjJfRjEgPSBuZXcgSW1hZ2UoMTMxLDE4KTsgbmV3bWVudTRfcjJf YzAxX0YyX0YxLnNyYyA9ICJpbWFnZXMvbmV3bWVudTRfcjJfYzAxX0YyLmdpZiI7DQpuZXdt ZW51NF9yMl9jMDFfRjJfRjIgPSBuZXcgSW1hZ2UoMTMxLDE4KTsgbmV3bWVudTRfcjJfYzAx X0YyX0YyLnNyYyA9ICJpbWFnZXMvbmV3bWVudTRfcjJfYzAxX0YyX0YyLmdpZiI7DQpuZXdt ZW51NF9yMl9jMDdfRjEgPSBuZXcgSW1hZ2UoNzAsMTgpOyBuZXdtZW51NF9yMl9jMDdfRjEu c3JjID0gImltYWdlcy9uZXdtZW51NF9yMl9jMDcuZ2lmIjsNCm5ld21lbnU0X3IyX2MwN19G MiA9IG5ldyBJbWFnZSg3MCwxOCk7IG5ld21lbnU0X3IyX2MwN19GMi5zcmMgPSAiaW1hZ2Vz L25ld21lbnU0X3IyX2MwN19GMi5naWYiOw0KbmV3bWVudTRfcjJfYzEyX0YxID0gbmV3IElt YWdlKDk3LDE4KTsgbmV3bWVudTRfcjJfYzEyX0YxLnNyYyA9ICJpbWFnZXMvbmV3bWVudTRf cjJfYzEyLmdpZiI7DQpuZXdtZW51NF9yMl9jMTJfRjIgPSBuZXcgSW1hZ2UoOTcsMTgpOyBu ZXdtZW51NF9yMl9jMTJfRjIuc3JjID0gImltYWdlcy9uZXdtZW51NF9yMl9jMTJfRjIuZ2lm IjsNCm5ld21lbnU0X3IyX2MxNl9GMSA9IG5ldyBJbWFnZSgxMDUsMTgpOyBuZXdtZW51NF9y Ml9jMTZfRjEuc3JjID0gImltYWdlcy9uZXdtZW51NF9yMl9jMTYuZ2lmIjsNCm5ld21lbnU0 X3IyX2MxNl9GMiA9IG5ldyBJbWFnZSgxMDUsMTgpOyBuZXdtZW51NF9yMl9jMTZfRjIuc3Jj ID0gImltYWdlcy9uZXdtZW51NF9yMl9jMTZfRjIuZ2lmIjsNCm5ld21lbnU0X3IyX2MyMF9G MSA9IG5ldyBJbWFnZSg5NCwxOCk7IG5ld21lbnU0X3IyX2MyMF9GMS5zcmMgPSAiaW1hZ2Vz L25ld21lbnU0X3IyX2MyMC5naWYiOw0KbmV3bWVudTRfcjJfYzIwX0YyID0gbmV3IEltYWdl KDk0LDE4KTsgbmV3bWVudTRfcjJfYzIwX0YyLnNyYyA9ICJpbWFnZXMvbmV3bWVudTRfcjJf YzIwX0YyLmdpZiI7DQpuZXdtZW51NF9yM19jMDJfRjEgPSBuZXcgSW1hZ2UoMzYsMjApOyBu ZXdtZW51NF9yM19jMDJfRjEuc3JjID0gImltYWdlcy9uZXdtZW51NF9yM19jMDIuZ2lmIjsN Cm5ld21lbnU0X3IzX2MwMl9GMiA9IG5ldyBJbWFnZSgzNiwyMCk7IG5ld21lbnU0X3IzX2Mw Ml9GMi5zcmMgPSAiaW1hZ2VzL25ld21lbnU0X3IzX2MwMl9GMi5naWYiOw0KbmV3bWVudTRf cjNfYzA0X0YxID0gbmV3IEltYWdlKDE0NSwyMCk7IG5ld21lbnU0X3IzX2MwNF9GMS5zcmMg PSAiaW1hZ2VzL25ld21lbnU0X3IzX2MwNC5naWYiOw0KbmV3bWVudTRfcjNfYzA0X0YyID0g bmV3IEltYWdlKDE0NSwyMCk7IG5ld21lbnU0X3IzX2MwNF9GMi5zcmMgPSAiaW1hZ2VzL25l d21lbnU0X3IzX2MwNF9GMi5naWYiOw0KbmV3bWVudTRfcjNfYzExX0YxID0gbmV3IEltYWdl KDY3LDIwKTsgbmV3bWVudTRfcjNfYzExX0YxLnNyYyA9ICJpbWFnZXMvbmV3bWVudTRfcjNf YzExLmdpZiI7DQpuZXdtZW51NF9yM19jMTFfRjIgPSBuZXcgSW1hZ2UoNjcsMjApOyBuZXdt ZW51NF9yM19jMTFfRjIuc3JjID0gImltYWdlcy9uZXdtZW51NF9yM19jMTFfRjIuZ2lmIjsN Cm5ld21lbnU0X3IzX2MxNF9GMSA9IG5ldyBJbWFnZSg2NiwyMCk7IG5ld21lbnU0X3IzX2Mx NF9GMS5zcmMgPSAiaW1hZ2VzL25ld21lbnU0X3IzX2MxNC5naWYiOw0KbmV3bWVudTRfcjNf YzE0X0YyID0gbmV3IEltYWdlKDY2LDIwKTsgbmV3bWVudTRfcjNfYzE0X0YyLnNyYyA9ICJp bWFnZXMvbmV3bWVudTRfcjNfYzE0X0YyLmdpZiI7DQpuZXdtZW51NF9yM19jMTdfRjEgPSBu ZXcgSW1hZ2UoODAsMjApOyBuZXdtZW51NF9yM19jMTdfRjEuc3JjID0gImltYWdlcy9uZXdt ZW51NF9yM19jMTcuZ2lmIjsNCm5ld21lbnU0X3IzX2MxN19GMiA9IG5ldyBJbWFnZSg4MCwy MCk7IG5ld21lbnU0X3IzX2MxN19GMi5zcmMgPSAiaW1hZ2VzL25ld21lbnU0X3IzX2MxN19G Mi5naWYiOw0KbmV3bWVudTRfcjNfYzIwX0YxID0gbmV3IEltYWdlKDU2LDIwKTsgbmV3bWVu dTRfcjNfYzIwX0YxLnNyYyA9ICJpbWFnZXMvbmV3bWVudTRfcjNfYzIwLmdpZiI7DQpuZXdt ZW51NF9yM19jMjBfRjIgPSBuZXcgSW1hZ2UoNTYsMjApOyBuZXdtZW51NF9yM19jMjBfRjIu c3JjID0gImltYWdlcy9uZXdtZW51NF9yM19jMjBfRjIuZ2lmIjsNCn0NCg0KLyogRnVuY3Rp b24gdGhhdCBzd2FwcyBpbWFnZXMuICovDQoNCmZ1bmN0aW9uIGRpMjAoaWQsIG5ld1NyYykg ew0KICAgIHZhciB0aGVJbWFnZSA9IEZXRmluZEltYWdlKGRvY3VtZW50LCBpZCwgMCk7DQog ICAgaWYgKHRoZUltYWdlKSB7DQogICAgICAgIHRoZUltYWdlLnNyYyA9IG5ld1NyYzsNCiAg ICB9DQp9DQoNCi8qIEZ1bmN0aW9ucyB0aGF0IHRyYWNrIGFuZCBzZXQgdG9nZ2xlIGdyb3Vw IGJ1dHRvbiBzdGF0ZXMuICovDQoNCmZ1bmN0aW9uIEZXRmluZEltYWdlKGRvYywgbmFtZSwg aikgew0KICAgIHZhciB0aGVJbWFnZSA9IGZhbHNlOw0KICAgIGlmIChkb2MuaW1hZ2VzKSB7 DQogICAgICAgIHRoZUltYWdlID0gZG9jLmltYWdlc1tuYW1lXTsNCiAgICB9DQogICAgaWYg KHRoZUltYWdlKSB7DQogICAgICAgIHJldHVybiB0aGVJbWFnZTsNCiAgICB9DQogICAgaWYg KGRvYy5sYXllcnMpIHsNCiAgICAgICAgZm9yIChqID0gMDsgaiA8IGRvYy5sYXllcnMubGVu Z3RoOyBqKyspIHsNCiAgICAgICAgICAgIHRoZUltYWdlID0gRldGaW5kSW1hZ2UoZG9jLmxh eWVyc1tqXS5kb2N1bWVudCwgbmFtZSwgMCk7DQogICAgICAgICAgICBpZiAodGhlSW1hZ2Up IHsNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICByZXR1cm4gKHRoZUltYWdlKTsNCiAgICAgICAgICAgIH0N CiAgICAgICAgfQ0KICAgIH0NCiAgICByZXR1cm4gKGZhbHNlKTsNCn0NCg0KLy8gc3RvcCBo aWRpbmcgLS0+DQo8L3NjcmlwdD4NCg0KDQo8c2NyaXB0IExBTkdVQUdFPSJKYXZhU2NyaXB0 MS4xIj4NCjwhLS0gQmVnaW4NCmZ1bmN0aW9uIHJpZ2h0KGUpIHsNCmlmIChuYXZpZ2F0b3Iu YXBwTmFtZSA9PSAnTmV0c2NhcGUnICYmDQooZS53aGljaCA9PSAzIHx8IGUud2hpY2ggPT0g MikpDQpyZXR1cm4gZmFsc2U7DQplbHNlIGlmIChuYXZpZ2F0b3IuYXBwTmFtZSA9PSAnTWlj cm9zb2Z0IEludGVybmV0IEV4cGxvcmVyJyAmJg0KKGV2ZW50LmJ1dHRvbiA9PSAyIHx8IGV2 ZW50LmJ1dHRvbiA9PSAzKSkgew0KYWxlcnQoIlNoYXJwUGFnZSBXZWIgRGVzaWduIFNlcnZp Y2VzIik7DQpyZXR1cm4gZmFsc2U7DQp9DQpyZXR1cm4gdHJ1ZTsNCn0NCmRvY3VtZW50Lm9u bW91c2Vkb3duPXJpZ2h0Ow0KaWYgKGRvY3VtZW50LmxheWVycykgd2luZG93LmNhcHR1cmVF dmVudHMoRXZlbnQuTU9VU0VET1dOKTsNCndpbmRvdy5vbm1vdXNlZG93bj1yaWdodDsNCi8v IEVuZCAtLT4NCjwvc2NyaXB0Pg0KPC9oZWFkPg0KDQo8Ym9keSBiZ2NvbG9yPSIjMDAwMDAw IiBhbGluaz0icmVkIiBsaW5rPSJyZWQiIHZsaW5rPSJSZWQiPg0KDQo8dGFibGUgd2lkdGg9 IjY0NCIgYm9yZGVyPSIwIiBiZ2NvbG9yPSJibGFjayIgYWxpZ249ImNlbnRlciI+DQo8dHI+ DQo8dGQ+DQoNCg0KDQoNCjxpbWcgc3JjPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LnNoYXJwcGFnZS5jb20vaW1h Z2VzL2VtYWlsaGVhZGVyMi5naWYiIHdpZHRoPSI2MzciIGhlaWdodD0iODQiIHVzZW1hcD0i I01hcCIgYm9yZGVyPSIwIj48bWFwIG5hbWU9Ik1hcCI+PGFyZWEgc2hhcGU9InJlY3QiIGNv b3Jkcz0iMyw0NiwxMzYsNjYiIGhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc2hhcnBwYWdlLmNvbS93aHlu ZXcuaHRtbCI+PGFyZWEgc2hhcGU9InJlY3QiIGNvb3Jkcz0iMTU4LDQ1LDI0OSw2NyIgaHJl Zj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zaGFycHBhZ2UuY29tL2Rlc2lnbm5ldy5odG1sIj48YXJlYSBzaGFw ZT0icmVjdCIgY29vcmRzPSIyNjUsNDUsMzgxLDY2IiBocmVmPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LnNoYXJw cGFnZS5jb20vc2VydmljZXNuZXcuaHRtbCI+PGFyZWEgc2hhcGU9InJlY3QiIGNvb3Jkcz0i NDAwLDQ0LDUxNiw2NiIgaHJlZj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zaGFycHBhZ2UuY29tL2Vjb21tZXJj ZW5ldy5odG1sIj48YXJlYSBzaGFwZT0icmVjdCIgY29vcmRzPSI1MzQsNDQsNjM1LDY1IiBo cmVmPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LnNoYXJwcGFnZS5jb20vc3VibWlzc2lvbnNuZXcuaHRtbCI+PGFy ZWEgc2hhcGU9InJlY3QiIGNvb3Jkcz0iNSw2Niw2OCw4MiIgaHJlZj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5z aGFycHBhZ2UuY29tL2luZGV4Lmh0bWwiPjxhcmVhIHNoYXBlPSJyZWN0IiBjb29yZHM9Ijc5 LDY1LDIzMiw4MiIgaHJlZj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zaGFycHBhZ2UuY29tL3Nob3djYXNlbmV3 Lmh0bWwiPjxhcmVhIHNoYXBlPSJyZWN0IiBjb29yZHM9IjI0Nyw2NiwzMjEsODIiIGhyZWY9 Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc2hhcnBwYWdlLmNvbS90ZXN0aW1vbmlhbHNuZXcuaHRtbCI+PGFyZWEg c2hhcGU9InJlY3QiIGNvb3Jkcz0iMzM1LDY2LDQxMyw4MiIgaHJlZj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5z aGFycHBhZ2UuY29tL29yZGVybmV3Lmh0bWwiPjxhcmVhIHNoYXBlPSJyZWN0IiBjb29yZHM9 IjQyNiw2Niw1MjMsODIiIGhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc2hhcnBwYWdlLmNvbS9wcm9qZWN0 c25ldy5odG1sIj48YXJlYSBzaGFwZT0icmVjdCIgY29vcmRzPSI1MzQsNjUsNjIyLDgxIiBo cmVmPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LnNoYXJwcGFnZS5jb20vY29udGFjdG5ldy5odG1sIj48L21hcD48 L3RkPg0KPC90cj4NCjx0cj4NCjx0ZCBoZWlnaHQ9IjY2NSI+DQoJDQo8dGFibGUgd2lkdGg9 IjYwMCIgYWxpZ249ImNlbnRlciIgYm9yZGVyPSIwIiBiZ2NvbG9yPSJibGFjayI+DQoJDQo8 dHI+DQoJDQo8dGQgYWxpZ249ImNlbnRlciIgd2lkdGg9Ijc1IiB2YWxpZ249InRvcCI+PGJy Pg0KPGJyPg0KPGltZyBzcmM9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc2hhcnBwYWdlLmNvbS9pbWFnZXMvd2h5 LmdpZiIgd2lkdGg9IjUwIiBoZWlnaHQ9IjIxOCI+DQo8L3RkPg0KPHRkIGFsaWduPSJjZW50 ZXIiPg0KCQ0KPHRhYmxlIGFsaWduPSJjZW50ZXIiIHdpZHRoPSI0NTYiIGJvcmRlcj0iMCI+ DQoJDQo8dHI+DQo8dGQ+Jm5ic3A7PC90ZD4NCjwvdHI+DQoJDQo8dHI+DQo8dGQgYWxpZ249 ImNlbnRlciI+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IndoaXRlIiBzaXplPSIzIiBmYWNlPSJhcmlhbCI+PHN0 cm9uZz48Zm9udCBzaXplPSI0Ij5XaHkgU2hvdWxkIFlvdXIgQnVzaW5lc3MgQmUgT24gVGhl IFdlYj88L2ZvbnQ+PC9zdHJvbmc+PC9mb250PjwvdGQ+DQo8L3RyPg0KPHRyPg0KPHRkPiZu YnNwOzwvdGQ+DQo8L3RyPg0KPHRyPg0KPHRkPjxmb250IGNvbG9yPSJ3aGl0ZSIgc2l6ZT0i MyIgZmFjZT0iYXJpYWwiPkl0IGlzIGV4dHJlbWVseSBpbXBvcnRhbnQgdGhhdCB5b3UgYXJl IDxmb250IGNvbG9yPSIjRkYwMDAwIj48YSBocmVmPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LnNoYXJwcGFnZS5j b20vc3VibWlzc2lvbnNuZXcuaHRtbCI+Zm91bmQgcXVpY2tseTwvYT48L2ZvbnQ+IGFuZCBl YXNpbHkgYW1vbmcgZXZlcnlvbmUgZWxzZSBvdXQgdGhlcmUgaW4gdGhlIGJ1c2luZXNzIHdv cmxkLiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyBBbmQganVzdCBhcyBpbXBvcnRhbnQgYXMgYmVpbmcgZm91bmQs IGlzIGhhdmluZyBhIHdlYiBzaXRlIHRoYXQgaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRpdmUgYW5kIHVzZWZ1bCB0 byB5b3VyIGN1c3RvbWVycy48L2ZvbnQ+IDxmb250IGNvbG9yPSJ3aGl0ZSIgc2l6ZT0iMyIg ZmFjZT0iYXJpYWwiPiAmbmJzcDtBIDxmb250IGNvbG9yPSIjRkYwMDAwIj48YSBocmVmPSJo dHRwOi8vd3d3LnNoYXJwcGFnZS5jb20vcHJvamVjdHNuZXcuaHRtbCI+d2VsbC1kZXNpZ25l ZCB3ZWI8L2E+PC9mb250PiBzaXRlIGlzIGEgbXVzdCBpbiB0b2RheSdzIGJ1c2luZXNzIHdv cmxkLjwvZm9udD48L3RkPg0KPC90cj4NCjx0ciBhbGlnbj0iY2VudGVyIj4NCjx0ZD48Zm9u dCBjb2xvcj0icmVkIiBzaXplPSIyIiBmYWNlPSJhcmlhbCI+PHN0cm9uZz4mbmJzcDsmbmJz cDs8L3N0cm9uZz48L2ZvbnQ+PC90ZD4NCjwvdHI+DQo8dHI+DQo8dGQ+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9 IndoaXRlIiBzaXplPSIzIiBmYWNlPSJhcmlhbCI+U2hhcnBQYWdlIFdlYiBEZXNpZ24gY2Fu IGNyZWF0ZSBhIHdlYiBzaXRlIHRoYXQgcmVmbGVjdHMgeW91ciBjb21wYW55J3MgaW1hZ2Ug YW5kIGF0dHJhY3RzIHlvdXIgdGFyZ2V0IGF1ZGllbmNlLiZuYnNwOyAgV2UgaGF2ZSBjcmVh dGVkIG1hbnkgPGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zaGFycHBhZ2UuY29tL3Byb2plY3RzbmV3 Lmh0bWwiPjxmb250IGNvbG9yPSIjRkYwMDAwIj5zdWNjZXNzZnVsIHdlYiBzaXRlczwvZm9u dD48L2E+IGZvciBhIHZhcmlldHkgb2YgYnVzaW5lc3NlcyBhbmQgd291bGQgbGlrZSB0byBp bnZpdGUgeW91IHRvIHJlYWQgd2hhdCBzb21lIG9mIHRoZW0gaGF2ZSB0byBzYXkgYWJvdXQg U2hhcnBQYWdlJ3Mgc2VydmljZXMgb24gb3VyIDxhIGhyZWY9Ind3dy5zaGFycHBhZ2UuY29t L3Rlc3RpbW9uaWFsc25ldy5odG1sIj5UZXN0aW1vbmlhbHM8L2E+IHBhZ2UuIDwvZm9udD48 L3RkPg0KPC90cj4NCjx0ciBhbGlnbj0iY2VudGVyIj4NCjx0ZD4NCjxoMT48Zm9udCBjb2xv cj0icmVkIiBzaXplPSIyIiBmYWNlPSJhcmlhbCI+PHN0cm9uZz4mbmJzcDs8L3N0cm9uZz48 L2ZvbnQ+PC9oMT4NCjwvdGQ+DQo8L3RyPg0KPHRyPg0KPHRkIGhlaWdodD0iMTE0Ij4NCjxw Pjxmb250IGNvbG9yPSIjRkZGRkZGIiBzaXplPSIzIiBmYWNlPSJhcmlhbCI+U2hhcnBQYWdl IGFsc28gc3BlY2lhbGl6ZXMgaW4gc3VibWl0dGluZyB5b3VyIHdlYiBzaXRlIHRvIGFsbCBv ZiB0aGUgbWFqb3Igc2VhcmNoIGVuZ2luZXMgYW5kIGdldHRpbmcgeW91IHRoZSByYW5raW5n cyB0aGF0IHdpbGwgZ2V0IHlvdXIgY29tcGFueSdzIHdlYiBzaXRlIG5vdGljZWQhICAgICZu YnNwO0xldCdzIGZhY2UgaXQgLSBpZiB5b3VyIHdlYiBzaXRlIGlzIGJ1cmllZCBvbiBwYWdl IDEwMCBvZiB0aGUgc2VhcmNoIGVuZ2luZSByZXN1bHRzLCBub2JvZHkgaXMgZ29pbmcgdG8g ZmluZCB5b3VyIGNvbXBhbnkgYW5kIHlvdSBsb3NlIHBvdGVudGlhbCBleHBvc3VyZSwgY2xp ZW50cywgYW5kIHByb2ZpdHMuICAmbmJzcDtUbyBtYWtlIHRoZSBtb3N0IG9mIHlvdXIgSW50 ZXJuZXQgYWR2ZXJ0aXNpbmcgYW5kIHNlcnZpY2VzLCB1c2UgU2hhcnBQYWdlJ3MgPGEgaHJl Zj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zaGFycHBhZ2UuY29tL3N1Ym1pc3Npb25zbmV3Lmh0bWwiPlN1Ym1p c3Npb24gU2VydmljZXM8L2E+LjwvZm9udD48L3A+DQo8cD48Zm9udCBjb2xvcj0iI0ZGRkZG RiIgc2l6ZT0iMyIgZmFjZT0iYXJpYWwiPiAgDQogIA0KICAgSWYgeW91IGFyZSBpbnRlcmVz dGVkIGluIGFuIHVwZGF0ZSBvciByZWRlc2lnbiBmb3IgeW91ciBjb21wYW55J3Mgd2ViIHNp dGUsIHBsZWFzZSBjYWxsIHVzIHRvbGwgZnJlZSBhdCAxLTg3Ny03ODUtMjU3MiBvciBzZW5k IHVzIGFuIEUtbWFpbCBhdCA8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86c2FsZXNAc2hhcnBwYWdlLmNvbSI+ c2FsZXNAc2hhcnBwYWdlLmNvbTwvYT4gZm9yIGEgY29uc3VsdGF0aW9uLiAgJm5ic3A7V2Ug bG9vayBmb3J3YXJkIHRvIHdvcmtpbmcgd2l0aCB5b3UhIDwvZm9udD48L3A+DQo8L3RkPg0K PC90cj4NCiANCjx0ciB2YWxpZ249Im1pZGRsZSI+DQo8dGQgYWxpZ249ImNlbnRlciI+DQo8 ZGl2IGFsaWduPSJjZW50ZXIiPjxmb250IGNvbG9yPSJyZWQiIHNpemU9IjIiIGZhY2U9ImFy aWFsIj48c3Ryb25nPjxmb250IGNvbG9yPSIjRkYwMDAwIiBzaXplPSIzIj5TaGFycFBhZ2Ug Y2FuIG1ha2UgYWxsIHRoaXMgaGFwcGVuIGZvciB5b3UmbmJzcDshPC9mb250Pjwvc3Ryb25n PjwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjwvdGQ+DQo8L3RyPg0KPHRyIGFsaWduPSJjZW50ZXIiPg0KPHRk PjxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpzYWxlc0BzaGFycHBhZ2UuY29tIj48aW1nIHNyYz0iaHR0cDov L3d3dy5zaGFycHBhZ2UuY29tL2ltYWdlcy9tYWlsLmdpZiIgd2lkdGg9IjE4IiBoZWlnaHQ9 IjE2IiBib3JkZXI9IjAiPjwvYT48L3RkPg0KPC90cj4NCjx0cj4NCjx0ZCBhbGlnbj0iY2Vu dGVyIj48aW1nIHNyYz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zaGFycHBhZ2UuY29tL2ltYWdlcy9hZGRyZXNz LmdpZiIgd2lkdGg9Mzk3IGhlaWdodD0zOSBhbHQ9IlNoYXJwUGFnZSBXZWIgRGVzaWduIiBi b3JkZXI9IjAiPjxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpzYWxlc0BzaGFycHBhZ2UuY29tIj48L2E+PC90 ZD4NCjwvdHI+DQo8dHI+DQo8dGQgYWxpZ249ImNlbnRlciI+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IiMwMEZG RkYiIGZhY2U9IlRpbWVzIE5ldyBSb21hbiwgVGltZXMsIHNlcmlmIiBzaXplPSIyIj48YSBo cmVmPSJtYWlsdG86c2FsZXNAc2hhcnBwYWdlLmNvbT9TdWJqZWN0PVJlbW92ZSAgJmJvZHk9 DQoqKioqKioqKiogVGhhbmsgeW91IGZvciBjb25zaWRlcmluZyBTaGFycFBhZ2Ugd2ViIGRl c2lnbiBzZXJ2aWNlcyAqKioqKioqKioqIj5UbyB1bnN1YnNjcmliZSBwbGVhc2UgY2xpY2sg b24gdGhpcyBsaW5rIGFuZCBzZW5kLjwvYT4uPC9mb250PjwvdGQ+DQo8L3RyPg0KCQ0KPC90 YWJsZT4NCjwvdGQ+DQo8L3RyPg0KPC90YWJsZT4NCjwvdGQ+DQo8L3RyPg0KDQo8L3RhYmxl Pg0KPC9ib2R5Pg0KPC9odG1sPg0K ------=_NextPart_000_001__62771865_27703.48-- From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Tue Dec 5 10:48:25 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id KAA21041 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 10:48:25 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA21546 for ietf-fax-bks; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 07:16:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from jsc-ems-vws02.jsc.nasa.gov (jsc-ems-vws02.jsc.nasa.gov [139.169.16.51]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id HAA21541 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 07:16:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from 139.169.16.21 by jsc-ems-vws02.jsc.nasa.gov (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Tue, 05 Dec 2000 09:17:43 -0600 (Central Standard Time) Received: by jsc-ems-gws02.jsc.nasa.gov with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 09:18:51 -0600 Message-ID: <81F639B56628D011A32D0020AFFC019007C20CC0@jsc-ems-mbs07.jsc.nasa.gov> From: "COLES, RICHARD J. (JSC-EV)" To: ietf-fax@imc.org Subject: spam Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 09:18:48 -0600 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Why are we starting to get all of this advertising??? First, I think, it was for a "nutritional supplement", then something else, now web hosting. Has there been a change of the rules of which I missed the notification? I remember subscribing to this group, so how do these advertisers send stuff to us so easily? Regards to list members (but not spammers), Richard Coles Lockheed Martin, in support of NASA/Johnson Space Center/Houston From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Tue Dec 5 11:44:29 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id LAA05543 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 11:44:29 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA29155 for ietf-fax-bks; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 08:14:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from cisco.com (omega.cisco.com [171.69.63.141]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA29151 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 08:14:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA17397; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 08:16:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 08:16:13 -0800 (PST) From: Dan Wing To: "COLES, RICHARD J. (JSC-EV)" cc: ietf-fax@imc.org Subject: Re: spam In-Reply-To: <81F639B56628D011A32D0020AFFC019007C20CC0@jsc-ems-mbs07.jsc.nasa.gov> Message-ID: <0012050815182.14236-100000@omega.cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: The spammers are simply sending mail to ietf-fax@imc.org. All IETF mailing lists are open to all posters to allow easy cross-posting between IETF working groups which may need to exchange information or get assistance from experts in related areas. -d On Tue, 5 Dec 2000 09:18 -0600, COLES, RICHARD J. (JSC-EV) wrote: > > Why are we starting to get all of this advertising??? > > First, I think, it was for a "nutritional supplement", then something else, > now web hosting. > > Has there been a change of the rules of which I missed the notification? > > I remember subscribing to this group, so how do these advertisers send stuff > to us so easily? > > Regards to list members (but not spammers), > > Richard Coles > Lockheed Martin, in support of NASA/Johnson Space Center/Houston > From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Tue Dec 5 12:51:11 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id MAA22298 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 12:51:10 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA04504 for ietf-fax-bks; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 09:18:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from pasiphae.eastgw.xerox.com (pasiphae.xerox.com [208.140.33.23]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA04496 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 09:18:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from norman.cp10.es.xerox.com (norman.cp10.es.xerox.com [13.240.124.12]) by pasiphae.eastgw.xerox.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA10333; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 12:20:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from x-crt-es-ms1.es.cp10.es.xerox.com (x-crt-es-ms1.cp10.es.xerox.com [13.240.124.41]) by norman.cp10.es.xerox.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA16735; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 09:22:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by x-crt-es-ms1.cp10.es.xerox.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 09:20:32 -0800 Message-ID: <918C79AB552BD211A2BD00805F15CE85042687CA@x-crt-es-ms1.cp10.es.xerox.com> From: "Manros, Carl-Uno B" To: Dan Wing , "COLES, RICHARD J. (JSC-EV)" Cc: ietf-fax@imc.org Subject: RE: spam Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 09:20:31 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Dan, Some WGs have introduced restrictions that only allow people on the WG DL to send messages, filtering out the spam, but that is not the common case. As long as there is a limited number of spam messages, I would just advice people to delete them when they show up. Carl-Uno Carl-Uno Manros Manager, Print Services Xerox Architecture Center - Xerox Corporation 701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231 Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514 Email: manros@cp10.es.xerox.com -----Original Message----- From: Dan Wing [mailto:dwing@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2000 8:16 AM To: COLES, RICHARD J. (JSC-EV) Cc: ietf-fax@imc.org Subject: Re: spam The spammers are simply sending mail to ietf-fax@imc.org. All IETF mailing lists are open to all posters to allow easy cross-posting between IETF working groups which may need to exchange information or get assistance from experts in related areas. -d On Tue, 5 Dec 2000 09:18 -0600, COLES, RICHARD J. (JSC-EV) wrote: > > Why are we starting to get all of this advertising??? > > First, I think, it was for a "nutritional supplement", then something else, > now web hosting. > > Has there been a change of the rules of which I missed the notification? > > I remember subscribing to this group, so how do these advertisers send stuff > to us so easily? > > Regards to list members (but not spammers), > > Richard Coles > Lockheed Martin, in support of NASA/Johnson Space Center/Houston > From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Thu Dec 7 00:30:54 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA16971 for ; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 00:30:54 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA23413 for ietf-fax-bks; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 20:57:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from bsd.gymparnr.sk (bsd.gymparnr.sk [195.168.176.67]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA23374 for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 20:57:50 -0800 (PST) From: hjghjgjh@yahoo.com Received: (qmail 16771 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2000 00:18:20 -0000 Received: from 1cust62.tnt1.los-angeles.ca.da.uu.net (HELO ng1e7BrZ3?) (63.57.183.62) by bsd.gymparnr.sk with SMTP; 6 Dec 2000 00:18:20 -0000 DATE: 05 Dec 00 4:37:56 PM Message-ID: SUBJECT: 1+1=2 Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: The Internet's Finest and Most Reliable Bulk Email Provider! Since 1996, Tech Data Technologies has provided bulk email service to thousands of well-satisfied customers. We offer the most competitive prices in the industry, made possible by our high percentage of repeat business. We have the most advanced, direct email technology, employed by only a knowledgeable few in the world. Our expert programmers have made it possible for us to penetrate any email blocking filter in use. We have over 120 million active email addresses, increasing our list at the rate of half a million to one million a month. We will put your product or service instantly and directly into the hands of millions of prospects! You will have instant, guaranteed results, something no other form of marketing can claim. Our turn around time is a remarkable 24 hours. Our email addresses are sorted by country, state and target. Your marketing campaign will speed with pinpoint accuracy to your desired audience! Your message can be presented in any language you wish, as plain text if you desire simplicity, or in html with color and graphics. Call us for a free consultation at (323)- 851- 8386 [U.S.A.]. We are open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. No one understands the global market like we do. For a limited time, take advantage of our holiday special -- two million general U.S. emails for just $450 per million! We include, at no cost, a bullet proof email address for 30 days, a $400 value! BULK EMAIL PRICES 500,000........................$375 750,000........................$562 1,200,000........................$720 1,600,000.................. ...$960 3,000,000......................$1,500 3,000,000+ ...................PLEASE CALL FOR A QUOTE Resellers welcome. We accept Visa, MasterCard and check by FAX. DON'T WAIT! LET TECH DATA TECHNOLOGIES BE YOUR PARTNER!! Under Bill s.1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th U.S. Congress this letter is not considered "spam" as long as we include: 1) contact information and, 2) the way to be removed from future mailings (see below).To Remove Yourself From This List: reply to this email with the email address that you would like removed and the word REMOVE in the subject heading. From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Sat Dec 9 13:00:41 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id NAA29156 for ; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 13:00:40 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA17957 for ietf-fax-bks; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 09:15:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from nt1.rocori.k12.mn.us (nt1.rocori.k12.mn.us [207.229.251.2]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA17653; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 09:12:12 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200012091712.JAA17653@ns.secondary.com> From: Mail Sender To: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org CC: ietf-ediint@imc.org, ietf-ediint-request@imc.org, ietf-fax@imc.org, ietf-fax-request@imc.org, ietf-fyiup@imc.org Subject: Russian Goods and Service from Moscow Reply-To: mailsender@mailsender.ru Date: 09.12.2000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: www.rusgoods.com www.rusgoods.ru ================================================================ We present you the production of the 1-st Moscow Watch Factory "Poljot" (Flying). From the simple mechanical watch of the series 2609 till unique, composite and precise mechanical o'clock - Marine timer . It is unique factory in Russia, which makes mechanical hours with the Swiss quality. Factory, which makes watches for the Russian Air Forces , Russian Naval Forces. All mechanical watch which we offer to you, will be delivered to you directly from the factory. If it isn't in the warehouse of the factory, we will place your order directly at the 1-st Moscow Watch Factory without any middlemans. The submarine "Kursk" had on board mechanical marine hronometr 6MX. =============================================================== The "table" of orders. Here you can to order, to find, to know almost everything, than the Russia is rich, everything that does not contradict Russian Federation laws. Here you can receive or order: The information about any enterprise, firm, organization, or person in Russia The production or any goods of Russian manufactories, and other things if it is possible. =============================================================== www.rusgoods.com www.rusgoods.ru From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Mon Dec 11 11:24:34 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id LAA16123 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 11:24:33 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA26734 for ietf-fax-bks; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 07:38:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from pp-mx0.tokyo.spin.ad.jp (PP-mx0.Tokyo.Spin.AD.JP [165.76.52.9]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA26730 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 07:38:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([207.137.70.77]) by pp-mx0.tokyo.spin.ad.jp (8.8.8+Spin/3.6W-JENS-stand2(09/30/00)) id AAA03990; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:40:59 +0900 (JST) To: ietf-fax@imc.org Subject: Re: new IFD and new compression values for TIFF-FX Extension From: Hiroshi Tamura In-Reply-To: <20001124080909M.tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp> References: <3.0.5.32.20001122112244.00a94d80@mail-333> <20001124080909M.tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp> <3.0.1.32.20001210201249.00d35f90@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.2 on Emacs 20.4 / Mule 4.1 (AOI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20001212004156A.adm@ifax.attnet.ne.jp> Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:41:56 +0900 (JST) X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140) Lines: 260 Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Folks, I announced the following registration is OK. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > New IFD Fields: > 406 - MultiProfiles > 407 - TIFF-FXExtensions > 436 - T88Options > 437 - SharedResources > > New Compression type: > 12 - JBIG2: Binary JBIG2, based on ISO 14492/ITU-T Rec. T.88. > --------------------------------------------------------------- But, I received the following mail from Adobe. He said our request was not enough. We are asked to re-request the registration. Anyway, editors and I will do some actions. -- Hiroshi Tamura, Co-chair of IETF-FAX WG tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp From: "Scott Foshee" Subject: Re: Your TIFF tag and compression type request Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:12:49 -0800 > Dear Tamura-son (and Claudio), > > Adobe developer support, per TIFF 6, can approve private tags in a certain > numeric range; this does not include public tags or items in a public > numeric range. Tina is the appropriate contact for approval of private > tags in the private numeric range. You may use me as your contact for all > other TIFF issues. > > Since the request you submitted to developer support was for items not > handled by developer support, their statements are not valid. And your > request could not have been approved. Approval of TIFF requests other than > the described private items comes from me. > > Thus, Adobe needs clarification of your request. If you would like four > private tags (in the private range) and/or a private compression flag (in > the private range), then this can be handled by developer support....but I > can pass/clarify your request to Tina if you like. However, if you would > like Adobe to consider public tags or our creating a public definition for > JBIG2 as compression type 12, you need to submit your request to me. If > this is the case, I can let you know what information will be needed by > Adobe for us to consider your request. > > I hope this helps clarify the status of your request. Please call or > e-mail if you have more questions. > > Regards, > > Scott Foshee > > > >Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 19:05:49 -0800 > >To: Hiroshi Tamura > >From: Scott Foshee > >Subject: Your TIFF tag and compression type request > > > >Dear Tamura-san, > > > >The purpose of this e-mail is to inform you that developer support's > statements--with respect to your request to register TIFF tags 406, 407, > 436, 437 and compression type 12--were not valid, and thus your request is > not approved. > > > >TIFF version 6 states that developer support can approve private tags in a > certain numeric range; this does not include public tags or items in the > public numeric range. > > > >If you would like four private tags (in the private range) and/or a > private compression flag (in the private range), please let me know. > However, if you continue to seek approval for public tags, please let me > know. Also, if you would like Adobe to create a public definition for > inclusion of JBIG2 data in TIFF, please let me know. In these two cases, > Adobe will let you know what information will be needed for us to consider > public tag definition/registration and/or how you can contribute to our > definition of a new compression type. > > > >Please call or e-mail if you have any questions. > > > >Regards, > > > >Scott Foshee > -------------- > At 08:19 AM 12/10/00 +0900, Hiroshi Tamura wrote: > >Dear Scott, > > > >Thank you for your mail, but I am confused. > > > >I received the mail from Tina(Adobe). > >The mail says, they are OK. The mail is below. > > > >Which is correct as Adobe, you or Tina? > >Also, I already announced in ML it is regiseterd. > > > >Therefore, if you are right, at first, please explain the reasons > >why it has changed, in ML(ietf-fax@imc.org). > > > >Next monday afternoon, we have a meeting at San Diego. > >If possible, please do in ML in Monday morning. > > > >Also, if you are right, our WG may another request. > >But, I cannot say in detail. I'm just a co-chair. > >There may be some comments from our members. > > > >Thanks in advance. > > > >Regards, > >-- > >Hiroshi Tamura, Co-chair or IETF-FAX WG > >tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp > > > > > >From: Adobe Developer Support > >Subject: TIFF tag and Compression Number > >Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 11:22:44 -0800 > > > >> Dear Tamura-san, > >> > >> Sorry for the delay. I have registered the TIFF tags (406, 407, 436, 437) > >> and the compression number (12) that you requested. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Tina Fredericks > >> GAP Developer Support > >> > >> At 04:19 PM 11/08/2000 +0900, you wrote: > >> >Dear Tina, > >> > > >> >I do not have any responses from you. > >> > > >> >Any responses are appreciated. > >> > > >> >Thank you for your help. > >> > > >> >Regards, > >> >-- > >> >Hiroshi Tamura, Co-Chair of IETF-FAX WG > >> >E-mail: tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp > >> > > >> > > >> >From: Hiroshi Tamura > >> >Subject: Request for public TIFF fields and private compression type > >> >Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:01:49 +0900 (JST) > >> > > >> >> Attn: Tina Wu, Graphics & Publishing Products Developer Support > >> >> > >> >> I am Hiroshi Tamura, co-chair of IETF FAX Working Group. > >> >> > >> >> As chair of the IETF Fax Working Group, I would like to request the > >> >> following four public TIFF field values, and one > >> >> public compression type for use in the extension of RFC2301 (TIFF-FX). > >> >> > >> >> Requested IFD Fields: > >> >> 406 - MultiProfiles > >> >> 407 - TIFF-FXExtensions > >> >> 436 - T88Options > >> >> 437 - SharedResources > >> >> > >> >> Requested Compression type: > >> >> 12 - JBIG2: Binary JBIG2, based on ISO 14492/ITU-T Rec. T.88. > >> >> > >> >> TIFF-FX (RFC2301) is the required file format for Internet Fax, as > >> >> specified in RFCs 2305 and 2532. It addresses representation of image > data > >> >> specified by the ITU-T Recommendations for black-and-white and color > >> >> facsimile. It formally defines minimal, extended and lossless JBIG > >> >> profiles (Profiles S, F, J) for black-and-white fax, and base JPEG, > >> >> lossless JBIG and Mixed Raster Content profiles (Profiles C, L, M) for > >> >> color and grayscale fax. These profiles correspond to the content of the > >> >> applicable ITU-T Recommendations. Files formatted according to this > >> >> specification use the image/tiff MIME Content Type. > >> >> > >> >> The Fax Working Group is currently addressing extension of TIFF-FX to > >> >> accommodate the ITU-T's recent adoption of new spatial resolutions > and the > >> >> new JBIG2 coder. The requested field IFD and Compression type values > were > >> >> selected in our attempt to retain continuity with those currently > used in > >> >> TIFF 6.0 and TIFF-FX. Should any of the requested values be not > available > >> >> then please provide alternate recommendations that would be consistent > >> >> with public use. > >> >> > >> >> Regarding technical questions, please contact Lloyd McIntyre. > >> >> > >> >> Technical contact person: > >> >> Lloyd McIntyre (Lloyd.McIntyre@pahv.xerox.com) > >> >> > >> >> I reply to any other questions. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Thank you for your help. > >> >> > >> >> Regards, > >> >> -- > >> >> Hiroshi Tamura > >> >> Co-Chair IETF Fax Working Group > >> >> tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp > >> > > >> > > >> > >> Tina Wu > >> Associate Developer Support Engineer > >> Graphics & Publishing Products > >> > >> > > > >From: "Scott Foshee" > >Subject: Your TIFF tag and compression type request > >Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 19:05:49 -0800 > > > >> Dear Tamura-san, > >> > >> The purpose of this e-mail is to inform you that developer support's > >> statements--with respect to your request to register TIFF tags 406, 407, > >> 436, 437 and compression type 12--were not valid, and thus your request is > >> not approved. > >> > >> TIFF version 6 states that developer support can approve private tags in a > >> certain numeric range; this does not include public tags or items in the > >> public numeric range. > >> > >> If you would like four private tags (in the private range) and/or a private > >> compression flag (in the private range), please let me know. However, if > >> you continue to seek approval for public tags, please let me know. Also, > >> if you would like Adobe to create a public definition for inclusion of > >> JBIG2 data in TIFF, please let me know. In these two cases, Adobe will let > >> you know what information will be needed for us to consider public tag > >> definition/registration and/or how you can contribute to our definition of > >> a new compression type. > >> > >> Please call or e-mail if you have any questions. > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Scott Foshee > >> > >> Scott Foshee, Ph.D. v: 408-536-4299 > >> Adobe Systems Inc. f: 408-537-4198 > >> 345 Park Ave. sfoshee@adobe.com > >> San Jose, CA http://www.adobe.com > >> > > > > > > Scott Foshee, Ph.D. v: 408-536-4299 > Adobe Systems Inc. f: 408-537-4198 > 345 Park Ave. sfoshee@adobe.com > San Jose, CA http://www.adobe.com > From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Thu Dec 14 19:13:41 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id TAA27767 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 19:13:41 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA19987 for ietf-fax-bks; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:18:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp (ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp [202.32.12.1]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA19983 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:18:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from thunder.ricoh.co.jp (thunder [133.139.211.198]) by ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W) with ESMTP id IAA22176 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 08:21:20 +0900 (JST) Received: from newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp (newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp [133.139.60.10]) by thunder.ricoh.co.jp (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W) with SMTP id IAA13730 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 08:21:19 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (maple.toda.ricoh.co.jp [133.139.60.73]) by newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp (8.6.11+2.4W/3.3W9-1.0S8sun) with ESMTP id IAA00560 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 08:21:16 +0900 To: ietf-fax@imc.org Subject: Re: Fax WG minutes - 11-Dec-2000 In-Reply-To: References: <20001212145318A.adm@ifax.attnet.ne.jp> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.2 on Emacs 20.4 / Mule 4.1 (AOI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20001215082607H.tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 08:26:07 +0900 (JST) From: Hiroshi Tamura X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140) Lines: 123 Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Folks, I'm back at my office.(I left San Diego on Wednesday). Here is the summary of FAX WG at San Diego. Claudio, thank you so much for your *detailed* summary. I will prepare the first draft meeting minutes based on this summary. Thanks to this summary, I can do within this year. Claudio, thanks again. Regards, -- Hiroshi Tamura, Co-chair of IETF-FAX WG E-mail: tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp From: Claudio Allocchio Subject: Re: Fax WG minutes - 11-Dec-2000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 19:53:58 +0100 > > > Here is the brief summary of the ietf-fax WG meeting, monday afternoon. > > The WG examined the status of the current drafts and the ongoing work, in > oder to confirm their situation. > > Currently there are some pending Draft Standard I-D whose work is > finished and underwent WG last call (just minor editorial corrections to > some of them): > > - draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-09.txt > - draft-ietf-fax-tiff-regbis-02.txt > - draft-ietf-fax-minaddr-v2-02.txt > - draft-ietf-fax-faxaddr-v2-02.txt > > they're now in AD queue for IESG processing. No further comments came > from WG. > > We discussed the "service" document revision (also targeted for Draft > Standard) > > - draft-ietf-fax-service-v2-02.txt > > its major current problem is its dependancy on DSN docs status. As > reported, the DSN documents editor is working in these days to produce > the new final Draft Standard docs for DSN in order to proceed. There are > no MDM dependacies in this document. > > On going work on I-Ds: > > Gateway issues: > > - draft-ietf-fax-gateway-protocol-02.txt > - draft-ietf-fax-gateway-options-00.txt > > some clarification were made into the text, splitting the original docs. > Currently there are still some points to clarify in the gateway behaviour > when non delivery notifications are involved. The docs do not > intentioanlly cover the multiple gateway crossing scenario, as it would > be a too complex situation to keep into this schema. > > Implementers guide is ready. Minor clarifications to it. The WG believes > it is very useful, and expecially needed now that products are being > released. > > - draft-ietf-fax-implementers-guide-04.txt > > ITU requested to re-submit an expired I-D: > > - draft-ietf-fax-ffpim-00.txt > > the editor will do it. > > The discussion on timely delivery (as to satisfy a request from ITU) > revealed that there are still some "last hop" considerations to be > clarified before the documents can be finalised: we need to make clear > with ITU which is the scenario, i.e. if the final "MUA" or "gateway" > action is what they intend as final delivery. In such a case, the WG > believes we need much more than this simple definitions, and probably new > protocols between the final MTA and final MUA. > > - draft-ietf-fax-timely-delivery-01.txt > - draft-ietf-fax-content-negotiation-03.txt > > TIFF-FX extensions: the new lates extesions were presented. No further > comments from WG. > - draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-extension1-00.txt > > Partial Non Delivery Notification draft (from EMA / VPIM): the WG decided > it is not worth to continue with the specification: document will be dropped. > > - draft-ema-vpim-pndn-02.txt > > The WG than had a presentation of ENUM schema and current drafts, with a > request to define the eventual Resource Records which might be usueful > for internet fax service: the WG agreed it is a viable option. We will > consider making the specification. > > - draft-gallant-enum-ifax-00.txt > > We also had the update on how VPIM WG will use the EMUN specification, > chich is a possible solution also for i-fax > > - draft-ietf-vpim-routing-01.txt > > ITU Issues: the next ITU meeting is in June 2001. We received the formal > requests, and we will finalise the answer on the mailing list and in the > next meeting in March. > > We also revised the milestones: dates were confiurmed or modified > according to the editors comments. On document was dropped as considered > now irrilevant:Nov 2000 Final draft of Routing Considerations > Apprently we are on schedule with the other milestones (see WG minutes) > > We ended the meeting a bit late.. but the WG has a large amount of > documents to deal with. From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Thu Dec 14 21:29:41 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id VAA10528 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 21:29:40 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA23528 for ietf-fax-bks; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 17:57:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from latimer.mail.uk.easynet.net (latimer.mail.uk.easynet.net [195.40.1.40]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA23523 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 17:57:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.0.5] (mail.schema.co.uk [212.135.107.2]) by latimer.mail.uk.easynet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 732F554567 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 02:00:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from I0TKYG158 by 10.0.0.5 with SMTP (QuickMail Pro Server for MacOS 1.1.2); 15-Dec-2000 01:14:05 +0000 DATE: 14 Dec 00 8:15:55 PM From: 99p0eCFlU@mail.visual.lk Message-ID: <1BA0iHJTFY5U94AP> SUBJECT: web hosting Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: GET YOUR OWN 100 MEG WEBSITE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH TODAY! STOP PAYING $19.95 or more TODAY for your web site, WHEN YOU CAN GET ONE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH! DO YOU ALREADY HAVE A WEBSITE? ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TRANSFER THE DOMAIN TO OUR SERVERS AND UPLOAD YOUR DATA AND YOU ARE READY TO GO! YOUR NEW WEB SPACE CAN BE CREATED INSTANTLY WITH JUST A SIMPLE PHONE CALL TO OUR OFFICE. YOU CAN CHANGE THE DESIGN OF YOUR SITE AS MUCH AS YOU WANT with no extra charge! UNLIMITED TRAFFIC -- no extra charge! FRONT PAGE EXTENSIONS are FULLY SUPPORTED. A SET UP FEE OF $40.00 APPLIES for FIRST TIME CUSTOMERS. ALL FEES PREPAID IN ADVANCE FOR THE YEAR PLUS A $40.00 SET UP CHARGE. FOR DETAILS CALL 1 888 248 0765 if you are outside the USA, please fax 240 337 8325 Webhosting International From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Sun Dec 17 00:43:38 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA15931 for ; Sun, 17 Dec 2000 00:43:37 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA21522 for ietf-fax-bks; Sat, 16 Dec 2000 20:16:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from exchange.animenation.org ([209.109.142.132]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA21508 for ; Sat, 16 Dec 2000 20:16:52 -0800 (PST) From: KODAOSD@mail-spool.infovan.co.za To: Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 19:18:23 Message-Id: <264.214241.521645@mail.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit GET YOUR OWN 100 MEG WEBSITE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH TODAY! STOP PAYING $19.95 or more TODAY for your web site, WHEN YOU CAN GET ONE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH! DO YOU ALREADY HAVE A WEBSITE? ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TRANSFER THE DOMAIN TO OUR SERVERS AND UPLOAD YOUR DATA AND YOU ARE READY TO GO! YOUR NEW WEB SPACE CAN BE CREATED INSTANTLY WITH JUST A SIMPLE PHONE CALL TO OUR OFFICE. YOU CAN CHANGE THE DESIGN OF YOUR SITE AS MUCH AS YOU WANT with no extra charge! UNLIMITED TRAFFIC -- no extra charge! FRONT PAGE EXTENSIONS are FULLY SUPPORTED. A SET UP FEE OF $40.00 APPLIES for FIRST TIME CUSTOMERS. ALL FEES PREPAID IN ADVANCE FOR THE YEAR PLUS A $40.00 SET UP CHARGE. FOR DETAILS CALL 1 888 248 0765 if you are outside the USA, please fax 240 337 8325 Webhosting International From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Mon Dec 18 02:06:49 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id CAA05974 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 02:06:48 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA23556 for ietf-fax-bks; Sun, 17 Dec 2000 22:26:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from aomswin1.allenovery.com (mail1.allenovery.com [194.129.43.121]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA23550 for ; Sun, 17 Dec 2000 22:26:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.mindspring.com (unverified) by aomswin1.allenovery.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with SMTP id for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 06:29:21 +0000 From: To: Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 02:11:02 Message-Id: <587.770787.377967@mail.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit GET YOUR OWN 100 MEG WEBSITE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH TODAY! STOP PAYING $19.95 or more TODAY for your web site, WHEN YOU CAN GET ONE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH! DO YOU ALREADY HAVE A WEBSITE? ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TRANSFER THE DOMAIN TO OUR SERVERS AND UPLOAD YOUR DATA AND YOU ARE READY TO GO! YOUR NEW WEB SPACE CAN BE CREATED INSTANTLY WITH JUST A SIMPLE PHONE CALL TO OUR OFFICE. YOU CAN CHANGE THE DESIGN OF YOUR SITE AS MUCH AS YOU WANT with no extra charge! UNLIMITED TRAFFIC -- no extra charge! FRONT PAGE EXTENSIONS are FULLY SUPPORTED. A SET UP FEE OF $40.00 APPLIES for FIRST TIME CUSTOMERS. ALL FEES PREPAID IN ADVANCE FOR THE YEAR PLUS A $40.00 SET UP CHARGE. FOR DETAILS CALL 1 888 248 0765 if you are outside the USA, please fax 240 337 8325 Webhosting International From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Mon Dec 18 02:07:25 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id CAA05995 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 02:07:25 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA23580 for ietf-fax-bks; Sun, 17 Dec 2000 22:26:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from aomswin1.allenovery.com (mail1.allenovery.com [194.129.43.121]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA23563 for ; Sun, 17 Dec 2000 22:26:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.mindspring.com (unverified) by aomswin1.allenovery.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with SMTP id for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 06:19:57 +0000 From: To: Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 02:20:26 Message-Id: <878.765192.580139@mail.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit GET YOUR OWN 100 MEG WEBSITE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH TODAY! STOP PAYING $19.95 or more TODAY for your web site, WHEN YOU CAN GET ONE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH! DO YOU ALREADY HAVE A WEBSITE? ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TRANSFER THE DOMAIN TO OUR SERVERS AND UPLOAD YOUR DATA AND YOU ARE READY TO GO! YOUR NEW WEB SPACE CAN BE CREATED INSTANTLY WITH JUST A SIMPLE PHONE CALL TO OUR OFFICE. YOU CAN CHANGE THE DESIGN OF YOUR SITE AS MUCH AS YOU WANT with no extra charge! UNLIMITED TRAFFIC -- no extra charge! FRONT PAGE EXTENSIONS are FULLY SUPPORTED. A SET UP FEE OF $40.00 APPLIES for FIRST TIME CUSTOMERS. ALL FEES PREPAID IN ADVANCE FOR THE YEAR PLUS A $40.00 SET UP CHARGE. FOR DETAILS CALL 1 888 248 0765 if you are outside the USA, please fax 240 337 8325 Webhosting International From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Mon Dec 18 03:57:14 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id DAA06691 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 03:57:14 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA14230 for ietf-fax-bks; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 00:02:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp (ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp [202.32.12.1]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA14221 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 00:02:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from thunder.ricoh.co.jp (thunder [133.139.211.198]) by ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W) with ESMTP id RAA29473 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:05:46 +0900 (JST) Received: from newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp (newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp [133.139.60.10]) by thunder.ricoh.co.jp (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W) with SMTP id RAA00425 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:05:45 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (maple.toda.ricoh.co.jp [133.139.60.73]) by newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp (8.6.11+2.4W/3.3W9-1.0S8sun) with ESMTP id RAA24848 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:05:37 +0900 To: ietf-fax@imc.org Subject: draft FAX WG meeting minutes at San Diego X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.2 on Emacs 20.4 / Mule 4.1 (AOI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; boundary="--Next_Part(Mon_Dec_18_17:10:19_2000_955)--" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20001218171036L.tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:10:36 +0900 (JST) From: Hiroshi Tamura X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140) Lines: 369 Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: ----Next_Part(Mon_Dec_18_17:10:19_2000_955)-- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Folks, Attached is the draft meeting minutes at San Diego. Thanks to Graham and Claudio, I finished it early. Please check it. The deadline to IETF is January 12, 2001. But, during January by the deadline, there may be only one day(Jan 9) when I can check my mails because of my holiday and my work schedule. So, if there are corrections, additions or modifications that you would like to have, please let me know *SOON*. If possible, I would have them by *December 26*. Any comments are appreciated. To editors of I-Ds: Please confirm the milestone section. If there are not appropriate ones, please let Claudio and me know and modify it. Thanks in advance for your cooperation. Regards, -- Hiroshi Tamura, Co-chair of IETF-FAX WG E-mail: tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp ----Next_Part(Mon_Dec_18_17:10:19_2000_955)-- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="49th_fax-wg_minutes.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Minutes of Internet fax WG (fax) at IETF-49 San Diego ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 15:30 - 17:45, December 11, 2000 Chaired by Claudio Allocchio and Hiroshi Tamura Reported by Graham Klyne, Claudio Allocchio and Hiroshi Tamura All slides at the meeting are found at the following URL: http://www.imc.org/ietf-fax/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Agenda bashing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hiroshi Tamura introduced the agenda and it was accepted. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Status of pending Draft Standards ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2.1 TIFF-FX ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hiroshi Tamura introduced the current status. There are the two I-Ds. - draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-09.txt (Obsoleting RFC 2301) - draft-ietf-fax-tiff-regbis-02.txt (Obsoleting RFC 2302) They are on IESG Last Call. The former should be Draft Standard, while the latter should be BCP. There were no comments at the meeting. The deadline by IESG Last Call is January 2, 2000. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2.2 Addressing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hiroshi Tamura introduced the current status. There are the two I-Ds. - draft-ietf-fax-minaddr-v2-02.txt (Obsoleting RFC 2303) - draft-ietf-fax-faxaddr-v2-02.txt (Obsoleting RFC 2304) The WG Last Call already completed and the WG requested Draft Standard consideration to IETSG. At the meeting. Ned Freed, who is our Area Director, told us that he is in process of reviewing them. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 Targeted for Draft Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 3.1 Service (Simple mode) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hiroshi Tamura introduced the current status. There is the one I-D. - draft-ietf-fax-service-v2-02.txt (Obsoleting RFC 2305) There is a dependancy issue. It refers RFC 2301 (TIFF-FX), RFC 2304 (Addressing) and RFC 1894 (DSN format) normatively. RFC 2301 and 2304 are moving to Draft Standard by effort within Fax WG. Claudio Allocchio addressed the DSN status. The editors are working these days to produce the new final I-D for Draft Standard in order to proceed. It also needs to collect data about which features are being used by current implementations. There is no MDM dependancy in this document. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 On-going Internet-Drafts ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4.1 Gateway issue ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Katsuhiko Mimura presented the two I-Ds. - draft-ietf-fax-gateway-protocol-02.txt - draft-ietf-fax-gateway-options-00.txt They address internet fax gateway protocol which has two functions: onramp and offramp. With regard to "protocol-02" I-D, the main differences between the previous version and -02 are as follows. - Change Title to "Internet FAX Gateway Functions". - Only "Simple Mode" is applied. - "Store and Forward" operational mode - Add addressing and examples "An offramp gateway MUST process the mailbox string and convert it to a local-phone according to the local dialing rules." - Move the following items to "options-00" I-D. [Offramp gateway] - Drop Duplications - Automatic re-transmission in the delivery error occurrence - Error Behavior - When send return notice - keep log [Onramp Gateway] - Example of User authorization - keep log With regard to "options-00" I-D, it aims to "Informational" status. It does not intend to specify the actions for Internet FAX Gateway, but addresses guideline of gateway optional services and some examples. There were several comments. How to "keep log" is not mentioned in I-Ds. It was suggested that description on security consideration is not enough and the expression "data mode is simple mode" is not suitable. The editor will modify the I-Ds, considering those suggestion. Currently there are still some points to clarify in the gateway behaviour when non delivery notifications are involved. The I-Ds do not intentioanlly cover the multiple gateway crossing scenario, as it would be a too complex situation to keep into this schema. The targat date of the final version is March 2001. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4.2 Implementers Guide ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hiroshi Tamura presented. - draft-ietf-fax-implementers-guide-04.txt. It addresses implementation guidance for RFC 2301, RFC 2305, RFC 2532, etc. The main difference from the previous version is addition of encoding in ESMTP commands. '+' and '=' must be hex-encoded within optional ESMPT commands like ORCPT. There were two minor disagreements. One is the content of "Subject" field in DSN and MDN. It was ambiguous and there were suggestive phrases. The ediotors will modify according to it. The other is the description on "TIFF magic numbers". Disregarding values tends to lead to implementations that try to print random data, which is not a good thing. The advice given is not helpful. It should be checked against the original implementation reports that gave rise to this issue. Mike Moldovan wrote this part, he was asked to clarify it. There were comments on "multipart/alternative". Simple mode is sent as image/tiff, not multipart/alternative, but receivers are urged to handle multipart/alternative properly. Many current email implementations don't handle multipart/alternative properly. The WG believes it is very useful, and expecially needed now that products are being released. The final version will be done in January 2001. After the confirmation, the WG Last Call can be done. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4.3 FFPIM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4.3.1 FFPIM itself ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - draft-ietf-fax-ffpim-00.txt It is expired. ITU-T requests to re-submit it. The editor will do it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4.3.2 Content Negotiation and Timely Delivery ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Graham Klyne presented. - draft-ietf-fax-content-negotiation-03.txt - draft-ietf-fax-timely-delivery-01.txt There were no slides. He introduced them very briefly. There were few comments recently. He suggested to us, more review is necessary. With regard to Timely Delivery, there were lots of comments. The discussion (as to satisfy a request from ITU-T) revealed that there are still some "last hop" considerations to be clarified before the documents can be finalised: we need to make clear with ITU-T which is the scenario, i.e. if the final "MUA" or "gateway" action is what they intend as final delivery. In such a case, the WG believes we need much more than this simple definitions, and probably new protocols between the final MTA and final MUA. It needs careful review, according to current E-mail architecture. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4.4 TIFF-FX extension issue ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lloyd McIntyre presented. - draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-extension1-00.txt It is the first formal TIFF-FX extension I-D, which the editors already presented at the previous two IETF meetings. There are 5 extensions (E1 - E5) in the I-D. E1 - extension of Resolutions E2 - more than 3 MRC layers E3 - SharedData E4 - Profile T, JBIG2 b&w E5 - JBIG2 and Color There are required fields for the extension. - GlobalParametersIFD containing fields that apply across more than one page (global) - new TIFF-FXExtensions (identification mechanism for TIFF-FX extensions) There is a recommended field for the extension. - new MultiProfiles (signals use of extensions and/or more than one different encoding profiles in the processing of a single file) There are optional fields for the extension. - new SharedData (enables data to be shared between images, within pages and between pages) - new T88Options fields (T88Options is similar to T4, T6 and T82Options that are used with MH (G3), MMR (G4) and JBIG1) There is also an addition of "Compression = 12" for JBIG2. He addressed that TIFF-FX Extension1 draft 01 is provided prior to the next meeting and Schema (RFC 2879) Extension draft 00 is done after TIFF-FX Extension1 draft 01, possibly prior to next meeting. There were no comments at the meeting. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 PNDN (Partial Non-Delivery Notifications) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Eric Burger presented. - draft-ema-vpim-pndn-02.txt It is the draft from EMA/VPIM. Current DSN only reports "all success" or "all failure". PNDN is useful if one needs per-part reporting. For example, if some critical parts delivered and others not, sender may want to consider successful parts delivered, report on unsuccessful parts. VPIM WG dropped PNDN, because critical content draft is satisfactory. PNDN format is based on DSN format and there are some extensions. At the meeting, there were no supports to include it in Ifax. Fax WG decided not to continue with the specification. The I-D will be dropped. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 Issue from Other WGs ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - Enum itself Richard Shockey, who is a chair of ENUM WG, presented what ENUM is. ENUM is to map E.164 telephone number into internet service. The specific output is URI such as "mailto" and "sip", using DNS. It is described in RFC 2916 (E.164 number and DNS). He also introduced current I-Ds and the cooperation between ENUM WG and ITU-T SG2. There was a comment that ENUM issue may be included in the IFAX implementers guide. - draft-gallant-enum-ifax-00.txt Andrew Gallant presented it. He requests to define the eventual Resource Records like t37ifax and t38ifax, which might be usuful for internet fax service. There was a comment about how simple or full mode is selected by ENUM service selection. "t37ifax" does not seem to be enough. There was a question about whether this item is appropriate for FAX WG. At the meeting, there was no conclusion about it. But, the WG agreed it is be a viable option. Making things like the specification may be considered. - draft-ietf-vpim-routing-01.txt Glenn Parsons, who is a co-chair of VPIM WG, introduced it. He presented how VPIM WG uses the EMUN specification, which may be a possible solution also for i-fax. There are Complete Service and Basic Service. There were no comments. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 7 ITU issue ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hiroshi Tamura and Toru Maeda attended ITU-T SG16 meeting in November and introduced the two letters. The response is needed by the next SG16 meeting in May or June 2000. One letter is about Full mode issue. It requests re-issue of FFPIM I-Ds. ITU-T understood the two I-Ds on content-negotion and implmenters guide is satisfactory for their requests. But, ITU-T still needs Fax status information in DSN and MDN, because the same level information as G3fax is important. ITU-T people will write a I-D about it. The other letter is about Terminal mode issue, which Toru Maeda already presented very briefly at Pittsburgh meeting. T.37 Terminal Mode which supports the transfer of image data, capabilities exchange and confirmation for Store and Forward internet fax terminals having limited memory and small CPU power. It extends Internet fax capabilities to enable all features of Group 3 facsimile to be supported on the Internet using T.30 signals in capability exchange. ITU-T requests: - Is it able to add Terminal Mode in the charter of Fax WG for technical discussion in IETF? - If the charter will not be able amended to discuss Terminal Mode in the Fax WG, IETF is requested to provide reasons for their decisions with required to whether proceed or not proceed the Terminal Mode in IETF. There were no comments at the meeting. As some people did not read the letter yet, he encouraged us to read it carefully. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 Confirmation of Milestone ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Claudio Allocchio addressed this item. Updated milestone is as follows. Jan 2001 Final draft for implementers guide Jan 2001 WG Last Call Jan 2001 Final draft for timely delivery Mar 2001 WG Last Call Jan 2001 Final draft for content negotiaton for fax Mar 2001 WG Last Call Mar 2001 Final draft of gateway requirements (two I-Ds) Mar 2001 WG Last Call (draft of Routing Considerations: We agreed to drop it.) Mar 2001 -01 draft for TIFF-FX extension Mar 2001 -00 draft for Schema extention The followings were not addressed at the meeting, but they must to be confirmed sooner or later. Jan 2001 Final draft of FFPIM Mar 2001 WG Last Call xxx 2001 final draft for TIFF-FX extension yyy 2001 final draft for Schema extention These are just plans. They are subject to change according to discussion. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 Closing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Claudio Allocchio announced the FAX WG meeting was closed. ----Next_Part(Mon_Dec_18_17:10:19_2000_955)---- From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Mon Dec 18 11:18:29 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id LAA10355 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 11:18:28 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA07473 for ietf-fax-bks; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 07:44:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from dnspri.npac.com (firewall-user@dnspri.npac.com [208.143.33.66]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA07464 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 07:44:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by dnspri.npac.com; id JAA10837; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 09:47:59 -0600 (CST) Received: from unknown(192.168.23.4) by dnspri.npac.com via smap (V5.0) id xma010823; Mon, 18 Dec 00 09:47:50 -0600 Received: by chi02.chicago.npac.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 09:45:58 -0600 Message-ID: From: Andy Gallant To: ietf-fax@imc.org Cc: Richard Shockey Subject: question on fax protocols in NAPTRs for ENUM Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 09:51:44 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: To the ietf-fax list: Following up after the Fax WG session at IETF49, a quick survey of RFCs and internet drafts did not readily produce an answer to the question: How useful would it be for an Internet-aware fax device to use an ENUM query to distinguish between the simple and extended modes of store-and-forward (T.37) fax? For now, I plan to refine "t37fax+E2U" and "t38fax+E2U" as the values for the service field of NAPTR resource records for ENUM. An internet-aware fax device would use these to derive service-specific information after querying DNS about the phone number (actually the ENUM name of the phone number). Using t37/t38 is a clear way to give to an IAF device the ability to distinguish between store-and-forward and real-time fax at a very high level. Is there a need for more (or different) values? So far, I don't see anything else at this level, and I don't see how the ability to distinguish between simple and extended modes would fit in here. I'm hoping that Internet fax experts might think about the proposed use of ENUM and give some feedback to the list or to me directly. Thanks in advance for your comments, references, or advice. -Andy Gallant andrew.gallant@neustar.com +1-202-533-2812/2976 (tel/fax) From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Mon Dec 18 19:12:24 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id TAA18620 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 19:12:24 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA02829 for ietf-fax-bks; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 15:36:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp (ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp [202.32.12.1]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA02825 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 15:35:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from thunder.ricoh.co.jp (thunder [133.139.211.198]) by ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W) with ESMTP id IAA19088; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 08:38:58 +0900 (JST) Received: from newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp (newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp [133.139.60.10]) by thunder.ricoh.co.jp (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W) with SMTP id IAA20819; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 08:38:58 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (maple.toda.ricoh.co.jp [133.139.60.73]) by newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp (8.6.11+2.4W/3.3W9-1.0S8sun) with ESMTP id IAA28802; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 08:38:55 +0900 To: Andrew.Gallant@neustar.com Cc: ietf-fax@imc.org, rich.shockey@neustar.com Subject: Re: question on fax protocols in NAPTRs for ENUM In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.2 on Emacs 20.4 / Mule 4.1 (AOI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20001219084352K.tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 08:43:52 +0900 (JST) From: Hiroshi Tamura X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140) Lines: 35 Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Andy, If my understanding for ENUM is correct, > Using t37/t38 is a clear way to give to an IAF device the ability to > distinguish between store-and-forward and real-time fax at a very high > level. Is there a need for more (or different) values? So far, I don't see > anything else at this level, and I don't see how the ability to distinguish > between simple and extended modes would fit in here. G3fax - (PSTN) - Gateway - (internet) - T37ifax Gateway understands ENUM as well as T.30 and T.37. When gateway is called from G3fax, it must issue DIS signal in T.30 to G3fax. If T37ifax is "simple mode" ifax, it issues DIS that does NOT have capabilites such as "MMR", 400dpi, etc. If he is "full mode" ifax(eifax), it does DIS that may have them. But, it is difficult to decide what kinds of DIS gateway should issue. Because, there are lots of bit combinations in DIS. Therefore, separating simply two values(or fields) for t37ifax does not solve, I think. It depends upon the service or somthing. In that case, only t37ifax may be enough,,, I do not know well. Ideally, Rescap or something can solve. But, it's a long, long way. Capabilities issues are always difficult. Regards, -- Hiroshi Tamura, Ricoh Company, LTD. E-mail: tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Tue Dec 19 00:27:14 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA24789 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 00:27:14 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA09604 for ietf-fax-bks; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:53:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from craven-college.ac.uk ([212.219.3.10]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA09600 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:53:00 -0800 (PST) From: DADPA@sbf.it Received: from mail.mindspring.com by craven-college.ac.uk (8.9.3+Sun/SMI-SVR4) id EAA00510; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 04:54:30 GMT To: Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:15:21 Message-Id: <547.465740.47982@mail.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit GET YOUR OWN 100 MEG WEBSITE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH TODAY! STOP PAYING $19.95 or more TODAY for your web site, WHEN YOU CAN GET ONE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH! DO YOU ALREADY HAVE A WEBSITE? ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TRANSFER THE DOMAIN TO OUR SERVERS AND UPLOAD YOUR DATA AND YOU ARE READY TO GO! YOUR NEW WEB SPACE CAN BE CREATED INSTANTLY WITH JUST A SIMPLE PHONE CALL TO OUR OFFICE. YOU CAN CHANGE THE DESIGN OF YOUR SITE AS MUCH AS YOU WANT with no extra charge! UNLIMITED TRAFFIC -- no extra charge! FRONT PAGE EXTENSIONS are FULLY SUPPORTED. A SET UP FEE OF $40.00 APPLIES for FIRST TIME CUSTOMERS. ALL FEES PREPAID IN ADVANCE FOR THE YEAR PLUS A $40.00 SET UP CHARGE. FOR DETAILS CALL 1 888 248 0765 if you are outside the USA, please fax 240 337 8325 Webhosting International From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Tue Dec 19 07:19:20 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id HAA11846 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 07:19:19 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id CAA16522 for ietf-fax-bks; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 02:44:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from craven-college.ac.uk ([212.219.3.10]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA16518 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 02:44:03 -0800 (PST) From: ldsakald@ourika.cybernet.net.ma Received: from mail.mindspring.com by craven-college.ac.uk (8.9.3+Sun/SMI-SVR4) id KAA28933; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 10:45:35 GMT To: Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 02:06:24 Message-Id: <498.149272.661828@mail.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit GET YOUR OWN 100 MEG WEBSITE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH TODAY! STOP PAYING $19.95 or more TODAY for your web site, WHEN YOU CAN GET ONE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH! DO YOU ALREADY HAVE A WEBSITE? ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TRANSFER THE DOMAIN TO OUR SERVERS AND UPLOAD YOUR DATA AND YOU ARE READY TO GO! YOUR NEW WEB SPACE CAN BE CREATED INSTANTLY WITH JUST A SIMPLE PHONE CALL TO OUR OFFICE. YOU CAN CHANGE THE DESIGN OF YOUR SITE AS MUCH AS YOU WANT with no extra charge! UNLIMITED TRAFFIC -- no extra charge! FRONT PAGE EXTENSIONS are FULLY SUPPORTED. A SET UP FEE OF $40.00 APPLIES for FIRST TIME CUSTOMERS. ALL FEES PREPAID IN ADVANCE FOR THE YEAR PLUS A $40.00 SET UP CHARGE. FOR DETAILS CALL 1 888 248 0765 if you are outside the USA, please fax 240 337 8325 Webhosting International From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Tue Dec 19 09:06:13 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id JAA13752 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 09:06:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id FAA01073 for ietf-fax-bks; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 05:29:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.commetrex.com ([216.181.108.27]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id FAA01068 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 05:29:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.commetrex.com(Lotus SMTP MTA Internal build v4.6.2 (651.2 6-10-1998)) id 852569BA.004A76EA ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 08:33:21 -0500 X-Lotus-FromDomain: COMMETREX From: "Steve Rudner" To: ietf-fax@imc.org Message-ID: <852569BA.004A7684.00@mail.commetrex.com> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 08:33:18 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: unsubscribe From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Wed Dec 20 00:05:14 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA04742 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 00:05:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA12993 for ietf-fax-bks; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 20:31:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from craven-college.ac.uk ([212.219.3.10]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA12989 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 20:31:20 -0800 (PST) From: fdvvdfv@dts1.domedia.com.tw Received: from mail.mindspring.com by craven-college.ac.uk (8.9.3+Sun/SMI-SVR4) id EAA13038; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 04:32:44 GMT To: Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 19:53:15 Message-Id: <342.324749.284568@mail.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit GET YOUR OWN 100 MEG WEBSITE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH TODAY! STOP PAYING $19.95 or more TODAY for your web site, WHEN YOU CAN GET ONE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH! DO YOU ALREADY HAVE A WEBSITE? ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TRANSFER THE DOMAIN TO OUR SERVERS AND UPLOAD YOUR DATA AND YOU ARE READY TO GO! YOUR NEW WEB SPACE CAN BE CREATED INSTANTLY WITH JUST A SIMPLE PHONE CALL TO OUR OFFICE. YOU CAN CHANGE THE DESIGN OF YOUR SITE AS MUCH AS YOU WANT with no extra charge! UNLIMITED TRAFFIC -- no extra charge! FRONT PAGE EXTENSIONS are FULLY SUPPORTED. A SET UP FEE OF $40.00 APPLIES for FIRST TIME CUSTOMERS. ALL FEES PREPAID IN ADVANCE FOR THE YEAR PLUS A $40.00 SET UP CHARGE. FOR DETAILS CALL 1 888 248 0765 if you are outside the USA, please fax 240 337 8325 Webhosting International From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Fri Dec 22 04:57:52 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id EAA27594 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 04:57:51 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA22023 for ietf-fax-bks; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 00:17:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from canongate.in.canon.co.jp (canongate.in.canon.co.jp [150.61.4.5]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA22018 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 00:17:16 -0800 (PST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by canongate.in.canon.co.jp (3.7W) id RAA12616 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 17:20:34 +0900 (JST) Received: from (isvw1.cecn.canon.co.jp [150.61.8.152]) by canongate via smap (V2.1) id xma007482; Fri, 22 Dec 00 17:13:17 +0900 Received: from canongw.cecn.canon.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by isvw1.cecn.canon.co.jp (8.9.3/3.7W) with ESMTP id RAA27136 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 17:13:16 +0900 (JST) Received: from ffmmail.ffm.canon.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by canongw.cecn.canon.co.jp (8.9.3/3.7W) with ESMTP id RAA00917 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 17:13:12 +0900 (JST) Received: from 18209 ([172.22.36.208]) by ffmmail.ffm.canon.co.jp (8.7.4/3.4W3) with ESMTP id RAA14122 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 17:13:05 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.J.20001222172131.009fed70@ffmmail.ffm.canon.co.jp> X-Sender: maeda@ffmpop1.ffm.canon.co.jp (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58.J Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 17:25:47 +0900 To: ietf-fax@imc.org From: MAEDA toru Subject: Terminal Mode in IETF San Diego meeting Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Greetings, All, I explained about Terminal Mode in IETF San Diego meeting, but time was too short to do. I attached the slides on which I tried to explain about Terminal Mode. We have to reply about ITU-T Request by next ITU-T meeting on June 2001. We can discuss about the addition of Terminal Mode into the charter at the next IETF meeting. I will prepare the Internet Draft for the addition of Terminal Mode in the charter. So, let's enjoy our Holiday Season. Toru Maeda CANON Inc. Slides about Terminal Mode: [ITU-T Communication] - ITU-T wants to have a comment on D46 Proposal of T.37 Terminal Mode attached on the communication. - ITU-T is looking forward to have additional corroboration between IETF and ITU-T to standardize Internet Fax Terminal Mode. [Requirements of Terminal Mode] - T.37 Terminal Mode which supports the transfer of image data, capabilities exchange and confirmation for Store and Forward internet fax terminals having limited memory and small CPU power. - The Terminal Mode extends Internet fax capabilities to enable all features of Group 3 facsimile to be supported on the Internet using T.30 signals in capability exchange. - The mode will be implemented on G3FAX based Internet Fax terminals which communicate using G3 mode in PSTN and Terminal Mode in Internet. - The terminal may have gateway functions between G3Fax and Internet Fax Terminal Mode. - The one of the objectives of Terminal Mode is a simple protocol for ROM oriented fax devices not for PC based E-mail client. - The Terminal Mode may not be able to communicate to Simple Mode and Full Mode directory. [T.37 Terminal Mode (1)] - T.37 Terminal Mode which supports the transfer of image data, capabilities exchange and confirmation for Store and Forward internet fax terminals having limited memory and small CPU power, was proposed in ITU-T SG.8 Q.4 Rapportures meeting on June 2000. - The Terminal Mode extents Internet fax capabilities to enable all features of Group 3 facsimile to be supported on the Internet using T.30 signals in capability exchange. [T.37 Terminal Mode (2)] (1) Confirmation Mandatory MDN response, notification of success/failure of document processing and page by page status. (2) Capabilities exchange - Support capabilities expression to enable G3FAX features using T.30 signals - enable all features of Group 3 facsimile on the Internet. - Easy implementation for embedded fax terminal based on G3FAX system. [Request] (1) Is it able to add Terminal Mode in the charter of Fax WG for technical discussion in IETF? (2) If the charter will not be able amended to discuss Terminal Mode in the Fax WG, IETF is requested to provide reasons for their decisions with required to whether proceed or not proceed the Terminal Mode in IETF. ***************************** Toru MAEDA CANON Inc. OIP Technology Adv. 3 ***************************** From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Fri Dec 22 10:07:13 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary2.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id KAA04893 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 10:07:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA22514 for ietf-fax-bks; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 06:34:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from [213.56.213.1] ([213.56.213.1]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA22510 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 06:34:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAIL.MINDSPRING.COM by [213.56.213.1] with SMTP (QuickMail Pro Server for Mac 2.0.1); 22-Dec-2000 06:03:42 +0100 From: To: Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 20:23:18 Message-Id: <317.826484.327372@mail.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit GET YOUR OWN 100 MEG WEBSITE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH TODAY! STOP PAYING $19.95 or more TODAY for your web site, WHEN YOU CAN GET ONE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH! DO YOU ALREADY HAVE A WEBSITE? ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TRANSFER THE DOMAIN TO OUR SERVERS AND UPLOAD YOUR DATA AND YOU ARE READY TO GO! YOUR NEW WEB SPACE CAN BE CREATED INSTANTLY WITH JUST A SIMPLE PHONE CALL TO OUR OFFICE. YOU CAN CHANGE THE DESIGN OF YOUR SITE AS MUCH AS YOU WANT with no extra charge! UNLIMITED TRAFFIC -- no extra charge! FRONT PAGE EXTENSIONS are FULLY SUPPORTED. A SET UP FEE OF $40.00 APPLIES for FIRST TIME CUSTOMERS. ALL FEES PREPAID IN ADVANCE FOR THE YEAR PLUS A $40.00 SET UP CHARGE. FOR DETAILS CALL 1 888 248 0765 if you are outside the USA, please fax 240 337 8325 Webhosting International From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Fri Dec 22 21:31:59 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary2.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id VAA17389 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 21:31:59 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA23914 for ietf-fax-bks; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 17:58:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from [213.56.213.1] ([213.56.213.1]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA23910 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 17:58:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAIL.MINDSPRING.COM by [213.56.213.1] with SMTP (QuickMail Pro Server for Mac 2.0.1); 22-Dec-2000 07:27:05 +0100 From: To: Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 02:13:20 Message-Id: <117.537887.83064@mail.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit GET YOUR OWN 100 MEG WEBSITE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH TODAY! STOP PAYING $19.95 or more TODAY for your web site, WHEN YOU CAN GET ONE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH! DO YOU ALREADY HAVE A WEBSITE? ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TRANSFER THE DOMAIN TO OUR SERVERS AND UPLOAD YOUR DATA AND YOU ARE READY TO GO! YOUR NEW WEB SPACE CAN BE CREATED INSTANTLY WITH JUST A SIMPLE PHONE CALL TO OUR OFFICE. YOU CAN CHANGE THE DESIGN OF YOUR SITE AS MUCH AS YOU WANT with no extra charge! UNLIMITED TRAFFIC -- no extra charge! FRONT PAGE EXTENSIONS are FULLY SUPPORTED. A SET UP FEE OF $40.00 APPLIES for FIRST TIME CUSTOMERS. ALL FEES PREPAID IN ADVANCE FOR THE YEAR PLUS A $40.00 SET UP CHARGE. FOR DETAILS CALL 1 888 248 0765 if you are outside the USA, please fax 240 337 8325 Webhosting International From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Tue Dec 26 23:20:42 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id XAA01103 for ; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 23:20:41 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA17347 for ietf-fax-bks; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 18:44:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp (ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp [202.32.12.1]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA17342 for ; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 18:44:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from thunder.ricoh.co.jp (thunder [133.139.211.198]) by ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W) with ESMTP id LAA23796 for ; Wed, 27 Dec 2000 11:48:33 +0900 (JST) Received: from newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp (newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp [133.139.60.10]) by thunder.ricoh.co.jp (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W) with SMTP id LAA08834 for ; Wed, 27 Dec 2000 11:48:31 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (maple.toda.ricoh.co.jp [133.139.60.73]) by newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp (8.6.11+2.4W/3.3W9-1.0S8sun) with ESMTP id LAA11200 for ; Wed, 27 Dec 2000 11:48:27 +0900 To: ietf-fax@imc.org Subject: Re: draft FAX WG meeting minutes at San Diego In-Reply-To: <20001218171036L.tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp> References: <20001218171036L.tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.2 on Emacs 20.4 / Mule 4.1 (AOI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20001227115339U.tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp> Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 11:53:39 +0900 (JST) From: Hiroshi Tamura X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140) Lines: 13 Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Folks, > Attached is the draft meeting minutes at San Diego. There are no comments. I will submit tomorrow(JST), as it is. Have a happy holiday. Regards, -- Hiroshi Tamura, Co-chair of IETF-FAX WG E-mail: tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Thu Dec 28 00:40:12 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA01160 for ; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 00:40:11 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA14876 for ietf-fax-bks; Wed, 27 Dec 2000 20:39:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp (ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp [202.32.12.1]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA14870 for ; Wed, 27 Dec 2000 20:39:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from thunder.ricoh.co.jp (thunder [133.139.211.198]) by ricohigw.ricoh.co.jp (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W) with ESMTP id NAA26713; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 13:42:54 +0900 (JST) Received: from newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp (newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp [133.139.60.10]) by thunder.ricoh.co.jp (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W) with SMTP id NAA12547; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 13:42:53 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (maple.toda.ricoh.co.jp [133.139.60.73]) by newton.toda.ricoh.co.jp (8.6.11+2.4W/3.3W9-1.0S8sun) with ESMTP id NAA19018; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 13:42:47 +0900 To: minutes@ietf.org, ned.freed@innosoft.com, paf@cisco.com Cc: ietf-fax@imc.org, claudio.allocchio@garr.it Subject: IETF-FAX WG minutes at San Diego meeting In-Reply-To: <20000824184831C.tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp> References: <20000824184831C.tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.2 on Emacs 20.4 / Mule 4.1 (AOI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; boundary="--Next_Part(Thu_Dec_28_13:47:19_2000_955)--" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20001228134802P.tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp> Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 13:48:02 +0900 (JST) From: Hiroshi Tamura X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140) Lines: 352 Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: ----Next_Part(Thu_Dec_28_13:47:19_2000_955)-- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm Hiroshi Tamura, a co-chair of IETF-FAX WG. Attached is the FAX WG minutes at San Diego meeting. With regard to our slides, they are under the specified URL that is described in this minutes, as is the usaul case at our WG. Regards, -- Hiroshi Tamura, Co-chair of IETF-FAX WG E-mail: tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp ----Next_Part(Thu_Dec_28_13:47:19_2000_955)-- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="49th_fax-wg_minutes.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Minutes of Internet fax WG (fax) at IETF-49 San Diego ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 15:30 - 17:45, December 11, 2000 Chaired by Claudio Allocchio and Hiroshi Tamura Reported by Graham Klyne, Claudio Allocchio and Hiroshi Tamura All slides at the meeting are found at the following URL: http://www.imc.org/ietf-fax/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Agenda bashing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hiroshi Tamura introduced the agenda and it was accepted. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Status of pending Draft Standards ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2.1 TIFF-FX ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hiroshi Tamura introduced the current status. There are the two I-Ds. - draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-09.txt (Obsoleting RFC 2301) - draft-ietf-fax-tiff-regbis-02.txt (Obsoleting RFC 2302) They are on IESG Last Call. The former should be Draft Standard, while the latter should be BCP. There were no comments at the meeting. The deadline by IESG Last Call is January 2, 2000. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2.2 Addressing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hiroshi Tamura introduced the current status. There are the two I-Ds. - draft-ietf-fax-minaddr-v2-02.txt (Obsoleting RFC 2303) - draft-ietf-fax-faxaddr-v2-02.txt (Obsoleting RFC 2304) The WG Last Call already completed and the WG requested Draft Standard consideration to IETSG. At the meeting. Ned Freed, who is our Area Director, told us that he is in process of reviewing them. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 Targeted for Draft Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 3.1 Service (Simple mode) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hiroshi Tamura introduced the current status. There is the one I-D. - draft-ietf-fax-service-v2-02.txt (Obsoleting RFC 2305) There is a dependancy issue. It refers RFC 2301 (TIFF-FX), RFC 2304 (Addressing) and RFC 1894 (DSN format) normatively. RFC 2301 and 2304 are moving to Draft Standard by effort within Fax WG. Claudio Allocchio addressed the DSN status. The editors are working these days to produce the new final I-D for Draft Standard in order to proceed. It also needs to collect data about which features are being used by current implementations. There is no MDM dependancy in this document. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 On-going Internet-Drafts ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4.1 Gateway issue ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Katsuhiko Mimura presented the two I-Ds. - draft-ietf-fax-gateway-protocol-02.txt - draft-ietf-fax-gateway-options-00.txt They address internet fax gateway protocol which has two functions: onramp and offramp. With regard to "protocol-02" I-D, the main differences between the previous version and -02 are as follows. - Change Title to "Internet FAX Gateway Functions". - Only "Simple Mode" is applied. - "Store and Forward" operational mode - Add addressing and examples "An offramp gateway MUST process the mailbox string and convert it to a local-phone according to the local dialing rules." - Move the following items to "options-00" I-D. [Offramp gateway] - Drop Duplications - Automatic re-transmission in the delivery error occurrence - Error Behavior - When send return notice - keep log [Onramp Gateway] - Example of User authorization - keep log With regard to "options-00" I-D, it aims to "Informational" status. It does not intend to specify the actions for Internet FAX Gateway, but addresses guideline of gateway optional services and some examples. There were several comments. How to "keep log" is not mentioned in I-Ds. It was suggested that description on security consideration is not enough and the expression "data mode is simple mode" is not suitable. The editor will modify the I-Ds, considering those suggestion. Currently there are still some points to clarify in the gateway behaviour when non delivery notifications are involved. The I-Ds do not intentioanlly cover the multiple gateway crossing scenario, as it would be a too complex situation to keep into this schema. The targat date of the final version is March 2001. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4.2 Implementers Guide ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hiroshi Tamura presented. - draft-ietf-fax-implementers-guide-04.txt. It addresses implementation guidance for RFC 2301, RFC 2305, RFC 2532, etc. The main difference from the previous version is addition of encoding in ESMTP commands. '+' and '=' must be hex-encoded within optional ESMPT commands like ORCPT. There were two minor disagreements. One is the content of "Subject" field in DSN and MDN. It was ambiguous and there were suggestive phrases. The ediotors will modify according to it. The other is the description on "TIFF magic numbers". Disregarding values tends to lead to implementations that try to print random data, which is not a good thing. The advice given is not helpful. It should be checked against the original implementation reports that gave rise to this issue. Mike Moldovan wrote this part, he was asked to clarify it. There were comments on "multipart/alternative". Simple mode is sent as image/tiff, not multipart/alternative, but receivers are urged to handle multipart/alternative properly. Many current email implementations don't handle multipart/alternative properly. The WG believes it is very useful, and expecially needed now that products are being released. The final version will be done in January 2001. After the confirmation, the WG Last Call can be done. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4.3 FFPIM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4.3.1 FFPIM itself ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - draft-ietf-fax-ffpim-00.txt It is expired. ITU-T requests to re-submit it. The editor will do it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4.3.2 Content Negotiation and Timely Delivery ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Graham Klyne presented. - draft-ietf-fax-content-negotiation-03.txt - draft-ietf-fax-timely-delivery-01.txt There were no slides. He introduced them very briefly. There were few comments recently. He suggested to us, more review is necessary. With regard to Timely Delivery, there were lots of comments. The discussion (as to satisfy a request from ITU-T) revealed that there are still some "last hop" considerations to be clarified before the documents can be finalised: we need to make clear with ITU-T which is the scenario, i.e. if the final "MUA" or "gateway" action is what they intend as final delivery. In such a case, the WG believes we need much more than this simple definitions, and probably new protocols between the final MTA and final MUA. It needs careful review, according to current E-mail architecture. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4.4 TIFF-FX extension issue ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lloyd McIntyre presented. - draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-extension1-00.txt It is the first formal TIFF-FX extension I-D, which the editors already presented at the previous two IETF meetings. There are 5 extensions (E1 - E5) in the I-D. E1 - extension of Resolutions E2 - more than 3 MRC layers E3 - SharedData E4 - Profile T, JBIG2 b&w E5 - JBIG2 and Color There are required fields for the extension. - GlobalParametersIFD containing fields that apply across more than one page (global) - new TIFF-FXExtensions (identification mechanism for TIFF-FX extensions) There is a recommended field for the extension. - new MultiProfiles (signals use of extensions and/or more than one different encoding profiles in the processing of a single file) There are optional fields for the extension. - new SharedData (enables data to be shared between images, within pages and between pages) - new T88Options fields (T88Options is similar to T4, T6 and T82Options that are used with MH (G3), MMR (G4) and JBIG1) There is also an addition of "Compression = 12" for JBIG2. He addressed that TIFF-FX Extension1 draft 01 is provided prior to the next meeting and Schema (RFC 2879) Extension draft 00 is done after TIFF-FX Extension1 draft 01, possibly prior to next meeting. There were no comments at the meeting. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 PNDN (Partial Non-Delivery Notifications) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Eric Burger presented. - draft-ema-vpim-pndn-02.txt It is the draft from EMA/VPIM. Current DSN only reports "all success" or "all failure". PNDN is useful if one needs per-part reporting. For example, if some critical parts delivered and others not, sender may want to consider successful parts delivered, report on unsuccessful parts. VPIM WG dropped PNDN, because critical content draft is satisfactory. PNDN format is based on DSN format and there are some extensions. At the meeting, there were no supports to include it in Ifax. Fax WG decided not to continue with the specification. The I-D will be dropped. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 Issue from Other WGs ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - Enum itself Richard Shockey, who is a chair of ENUM WG, presented what ENUM is. ENUM is to map E.164 telephone number into internet service. The specific output is URI such as "mailto" and "sip", using DNS. It is described in RFC 2916 (E.164 number and DNS). He also introduced current I-Ds and the cooperation between ENUM WG and ITU-T SG2. There was a comment that ENUM issue may be included in the IFAX implementers guide. - draft-gallant-enum-ifax-00.txt Andrew Gallant presented it. He requests to define the eventual Resource Records like t37ifax and t38ifax, which might be usuful for internet fax service. There was a comment about how simple or full mode is selected by ENUM service selection. "t37ifax" does not seem to be enough. There was a question about whether this item is appropriate for FAX WG. At the meeting, there was no conclusion about it. But, the WG agreed it is be a viable option. Making things like the specification may be considered. - draft-ietf-vpim-routing-01.txt Glenn Parsons, who is a co-chair of VPIM WG, introduced it. He presented how VPIM WG uses the EMUN specification, which may be a possible solution also for i-fax. There are Complete Service and Basic Service. There were no comments. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 7 ITU issue ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hiroshi Tamura and Toru Maeda attended ITU-T SG16 meeting in November and introduced the two letters. The response is needed by the next SG16 meeting in May or June 2000. One letter is about Full mode issue. It requests re-issue of FFPIM I-Ds. ITU-T understood the two I-Ds on content-negotion and implmenters guide are satisfactory for their requests. But, ITU-T still needs Fax status information in DSN and MDN, because the same level information as G3fax is important. ITU-T people will write a I-D about it. The other letter is about Terminal mode issue, which Toru Maeda already presented very briefly at Pittsburgh meeting. T.37 Terminal Mode which supports the transfer of image data, capabilities exchange and confirmation for Store and Forward internet fax terminals having limited memory and small CPU power. It extends Internet fax capabilities to enable all features of Group 3 facsimile to be supported on the Internet using T.30 signals in capability exchange. ITU-T requests: - Is it able to add Terminal Mode in the charter of Fax WG for technical discussion in IETF? - If the charter will not be able amended to discuss Terminal Mode in the Fax WG, IETF is requested to provide reasons for their decisions with required to whether proceed or not proceed the Terminal Mode in IETF. There were no comments at the meeting. As some people did not read the letter yet, he encouraged us to read it carefully. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 Confirmation of Milestone ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Claudio Allocchio addressed this item. Updated milestone is as follows. Jan 2001 Final draft for implementers guide Jan 2001 WG Last Call Jan 2001 Final draft for timely delivery Mar 2001 WG Last Call Jan 2001 Final draft for content negotiaton for fax Mar 2001 WG Last Call Mar 2001 Final draft of gateway requirements (two I-Ds) Mar 2001 WG Last Call (draft of Routing Considerations: We agreed to drop it.) Mar 2001 -01 draft for TIFF-FX extension Mar 2001 -00 draft for Schema extention The followings were not addressed at the meeting, but they must to be confirmed sooner or later. Jan 2001 Final draft of FFPIM Mar 2001 WG Last Call xxx 2001 final draft for TIFF-FX extension yyy 2001 final draft for Schema extention These are just plans. They are subject to change according to discussion. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 Closing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Claudio Allocchio announced the FAX WG meeting was closed. ----Next_Part(Thu_Dec_28_13:47:19_2000_955)---- From owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Thu Dec 28 11:06:45 2000 Received: from ns.secondary.com (ns.secondary.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id LAA16852 for ; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 11:06:44 -0500 (EST) Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA10129 for ietf-fax-bks; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 07:35:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from bnfep02.winstar.net (bnfep02e.boone.winstar.net [63.140.240.54]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA10119 for ; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 07:35:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from commercilv4rrq ([63.140.12.10]) by bnfep02.winstar.net with SMTP id <20001228153933.EBP1303.bnfep02@commercilv4rrq>; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 10:39:33 -0500 From: "Commercial Lease Solutions" To: "Hiroshi Tamura" , , , Cc: , Subject: RE: IETF-FAX WG minutes at San Diego meeting Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 10:36:25 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <20001228134802P.tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please remove my name. Thank you. -----Original Message----- From: owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org [mailto:owner-ietf-fax@mail.imc.org]On Behalf Of Hiroshi Tamura Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2000 11:48 PM To: minutes@ietf.org; ned.freed@innosoft.com; paf@cisco.com Cc: ietf-fax@imc.org; claudio.allocchio@garr.it Subject: IETF-FAX WG minutes at San Diego meeting I'm Hiroshi Tamura, a co-chair of IETF-FAX WG. Attached is the FAX WG minutes at San Diego meeting. With regard to our slides, they are under the specified URL that is described in this minutes, as is the usaul case at our WG. Regards, -- Hiroshi Tamura, Co-chair of IETF-FAX WG E-mail: tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp