From braden at ISI.EDU Wed Oct 4 09:33:18 2006 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:33:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-i] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? Message-ID: <200610041633.JAA28685@gra.isi.edu> The RFC Editor needs to make an editorial decision on capitalization of "arpanet". This is such an important historical name that we felt a need to think a bit about it. Here is my memory: we originally called it "ARPANET", but over the years there has been a tendency to morph the name to "ARPAnet". The same thing happened to "NSFNET", which morphed into "NSFnet". Any opinions? Preferences? Hey, it's more interesting to me than the administrative hassles on ietf.org! ;-) Bob Braden From braden at ISI.EDU Wed Oct 4 10:09:19 2006 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 10:09:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-i] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? Message-ID: <200610041709.KAA28776@gra.isi.edu> I have had several private responses. Please share your wisdom! Bob From braden at ISI.EDU Wed Oct 4 11:03:58 2006 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 11:03:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-i] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? Message-ID: <200610041803.LAA28990@gra.isi.edu> My original query failed to add: IEEE style guide says "Arpanet: the oldest of the networks on the Internet; initial capital only" Smoke that, folks! Bob From braden at ISI.EDU Wed Oct 4 12:42:23 2006 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 12:42:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-i] [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? Message-ID: <200610041942.MAA29108@gra.isi.edu> Based upon the results so far, I think the RFC Editor will probably go with "ARPANET". We take Scott Brim as the expert on "NSFNet". Bob Braden From dhc2 at dcrocker.net Wed Oct 4 16:20:36 2006 From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 16:20:36 -0700 Subject: [rfc-i] [ih] ARPANET vs ARPAnet? In-Reply-To: <31DF50213ACFA64B8E17E203389CD1EB02CC8870@mtv-exbe-1.corp.google.com> References: <31DF50213ACFA64B8E17E203389CD1EB02CC8870@mtv-exbe-1.corp.google.com> Message-ID: <452441C4.3020500@dcrocker.net> Vint Cerf wrote: > > IEEE style guide says "Arpanet: the oldest of the networks on the > > Internet; initial capital only" > > Uggh. *Totally* bletchiferous. Worse than all three of the other options, any > of which I would *much* prefer to this. > > And how do we straighten out the IEEE? Would pointing out that all the > original documents use "ARPANET" do the trick? OK. So there's not much question that "ARPANET" was the original form. The question is whether the string ought to be permitted to mature. Lower case was rare back then. In addition all upper case is geeky. Now, maybe geeky is fine, and certainly falling back on claims of historical accuracy make the all-upper choice valid. My own view is that terms should become a naturalized part of the languge and that means they should match normal case choices. So I happen to think that "Arpanet" is more refined... d/ ps. THis also means we should get the hyphen out of email. -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From braden at ISI.EDU Tue Oct 10 16:04:07 2006 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:04:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-i] Joyce Reynolds graduates from USC/ISI Message-ID: <200610102304.QAA01957@gra.isi.edu> To those interested in the RFC Editor: The RFC Editor is saddened by the imminent departure of Joyce Reynolds from the RFC Editor staff. She is leaving ISI to take on a new and challenging job assignment elsewhere. The brass ring came by, and she grabbed it! Over many years, Joyce has made major contributions to the IANA, to the RFC Editor, and to the IETF. She worked with Jon Postel to perform the IANA functions, leaving her name on many related RFCs. She was IANA liaison to the IESG 1998-2001 and consulted with IANA after they separated from ISI. She played a key early role in shaping the protocol parameter registration function. Joyce has been a member of the IETF since 1988. She developed, organized, and led the User Services area of the IETF from 1988-1998, and was thus an IESG member. In her User Services role, she was an international keynote speakder and panelist in over 90 conferences around the world, spreading the word on the Internet. She established the user-service oriented document subseries of RFCs, the FYIs. She worked with Jon on documenting a number of protocol specifications, including POP, FTP, and Telnet Options. For a number of years, Joyce worked with Jon Postel on editing RFCs. Since 1998, she has been co-leader of the RFC Editor function, and she performed the final quality control function on most RFC publications. She also served as RFC Editor liaison to the IAB and to the IESG. Her knowledge of the IETF process and community and her good judgment were immensely helpful, and we will miss her help and advice a great deal. We expect that Joyce will still have a presence in the IETF, but she will be much missed at ISI! I know that Jon Postel joins us in wishing her the very best future in her new job. Bob Braden for the RFC Editor ----- End Included Message ----- From nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de Tue Oct 24 04:43:33 2006 From: nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de (Frank Ellermann) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:43:33 +0200 Subject: [rfc-i] Errata (2069) References: <424F2DCF.59E2@xyzzy.claranet.de> <42C65019.12E7@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: <453DFC65.2B5C@xyzzy.claranet.de> > No news about the (potential) 2069 error submitted 2005-02. Update: s/(potential)// I'm now sure, the implementation at tools.ietf.org accepted it, truncated log: | GET /group/nomcom/06/nominate HTTP/1.0 | Host: www1.tools.ietf.org | Authorization: Digest username="...", realm="...", uri="...", nonce="...", response="6b5198c6ce4651f5fed7c9a9e846499d" | HTTP/1.1 200 OK | Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 10:37:05 GMT | Server: Apache/2.0.55 (Debian) DAV/2 SVN/1.3.2 mod_fastcgi/2.4.2 ... Clearly a 2069 response, a 2617 response has more parameters. Frank 4282: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.rfc.interest/96 2822: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.rfc.interest/110 3777: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.rfc.interest/149 From bortzmeyer at nic.fr Fri Oct 27 02:09:58 2006 From: bortzmeyer at nic.fr (Stephane Bortzmeyer) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 11:09:58 +0200 Subject: [rfc-i] Still a duplicate in the pub queue Message-ID: <20061027090958.GA17733@nic.fr> For many weeks, there have been a duplicate in the pub queue: 2006-07-20 draft-ietf-sieve-rfc3598bis-05.txt MISSREF*R REF draft-ietf-sieve-3028bis NOT-RECEIVED K. Murchison Sieve Email Filtering -- Subaddress Extension Bytes: 14358 Working Group: Sieve Mail Filtering Language 2006-07-20 draft-ietf-sieve-rfc3598bis-05.txt MISSREF*R REF draft-ietf-sieve-3028bis NOT-RECEIVED K. Murchison Sieve Email Filtering: Subaddress Extension Bytes: 14358 Working Group: Sieve Mail Filtering Language This is specially a problem for the XML version because it renders it invalid: rfc-editor-queue.xml:500: element entry: validity error : ID draft-ietf-sieve-rfc3598bis already defined From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Fri Oct 27 11:01:30 2006 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (RFC Editor) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 11:01:30 -0700 Subject: [rfc-i] Still a duplicate in the pub queue In-Reply-To: <20061027090958.GA17733@nic.fr> References: <20061027090958.GA17733@nic.fr> Message-ID: <20061027180130.GE26533@isi.edu> Stephane, We are investigating the error. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. However, at this moment, we only see one entry for this document in both of our queues: http://www.rfc-editor.org/queue.html http://www.rfc-editor.org/queue.xml Please let us know if you are continuing to see this error. Thank you. RFC Editor On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 11:09:58AM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > For many weeks, there have been a duplicate in the pub queue: > > 2006-07-20 draft-ietf-sieve-rfc3598bis-05.txt MISSREF*R REF > draft-ietf-sieve-3028bis NOT-RECEIVED K. Murchison Sieve Email > Filtering -- Subaddress Extension Bytes: 14358 Working Group: Sieve > Mail Filtering Language > > 2006-07-20 draft-ietf-sieve-rfc3598bis-05.txt MISSREF*R REF > draft-ietf-sieve-3028bis NOT-RECEIVED K. Murchison Sieve Email > Filtering: Subaddress Extension Bytes: 14358 Working Group: Sieve Mail > Filtering Language > > This is specially a problem for the XML version because it renders it > invalid: > > rfc-editor-queue.xml:500: element entry: validity error : ID > draft-ietf-sieve-rfc3598bis already defined > From braden at ISI.EDU Tue Oct 31 14:51:58 2006 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:51:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [rfc-i] New 2-nroff.template Message-ID: <200610312251.OAA09978@gra.isi.edu> It was recently called to our attention that the nroff template is very out of date. We have therefore created a new one in ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc-editor/2-nroff.template. This version contains some useful hints for nroffers creating Internet Drafts and RFCs. This file is itself an nroff source file that can be processed (using the instructions it contains) to create an Internet Draft. It is not totally recursive, however; the 2-nroff.template file contains nroff comments that do not carry over to the Internet Draft. To reduce confusion, hopefully. Only the nroff lovers out there need apply. Bob Braden for the RFC Editor