IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt

Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> Sat, 12 January 2013 11:44 UTC

Return-Path: <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58F6621F850C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 03:44:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.577
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.577 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.022, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RWeKHXdhcqKI for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 03:44:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vc0-f174.google.com (mail-vc0-f174.google.com [209.85.220.174]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B540D21F84CA for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 03:44:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vc0-f174.google.com with SMTP id d16so2203836vcd.19 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 03:44:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=/C7B9OSG1pcBejAvMHAXUW6a9etJi4hWnc2+tIWz5wc=; b=mnIoMakzQDb8Wyq34BAayrW9Az1h0V2LV15022M0Lw5hujDg0Fph/lnrWhkJdY565S NsUtPAVpZjMkO5KE5kMkUZD0Av8UeD5p7lwmxPgGWkFhPfGb9x80IbNw/+7rSH0zisuE q1QQR8E1HWNSbNAGSOdpJEnhmwNsTfvNVGhFCPZh6zVvflPa4ZlGEjxvGLrNDei1ojSX tr+q9WT9qUJmawLXsvEhRCrnKC45Hda7ETm7BEtVy9jWJNTkRUwckx2Pwu4afZ3SNT8Z lI//KBW2eSJfrTXI9IDGnx+cZVZvzH6SZPo4N/uCpzbDkd1XTgW7RT2RQfPyoMe3Xfeg m4vw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.27.50 with SMTP id q18mr85245899vdg.20.1357991088110; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 03:44:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.220.145.5 with HTTP; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 03:44:47 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:44:47 +0100
Message-ID: <CADnDZ88jBeZQkzpxRt5Ru34VCwdoLG0+er=U95YgEUsA4Kx5Hg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt
From: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
To: sm+ietf@elandsys.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 11:44:49 -0000

Hi Moonesamy,

I also think similar with Carpenter, why reclassify to historic.
rfc2050 is still valid, and why limiting the ietf?

AB

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email