Re: IETF Y2K Compliance...

Ned Freed <Ned.Freed@innosoft.com> Fri, 09 July 1999 14:50 UTC

Received: by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) id KAA13021 for ietf-outbound.10@ietf.org; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 10:50:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from THOR.INNOSOFT.COM (SYSTEM@THOR.INNOSOFT.COM [192.160.253.66]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA12921 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 10:40:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from INNOSOFT.COM by INNOSOFT.COM (PMDF V5.2-32 #30494) id <01JDC9D8A71S8WZTRO@INNOSOFT.COM> for ietf@ietf.org; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 07:39:14 PDT
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 07:37:19 -0700
From: Ned Freed <Ned.Freed@innosoft.com>
Subject: Re: IETF Y2K Compliance...
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Fri, 09 Jul 1999 08:03:55 -0500" <034501beca0b$81159980$0101010a@naperville.unir.com>
To: Jim Fleming <jfleming@anet.com>
Cc: fred@cisco.com, Erik.Huizer@sec.nl, ietf@ietf.org, poised@lists.tislabs.com
Message-id: <01JDCPMN6PC28WZTRO@INNOSOFT.COM>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

> The IETF may not have noticed that this is 1999 and
> some organizations are trying to make sure that they
> are Y2K compliant. Using 2 digit year codes will not
> get you there. I suggest that you review all of the IETF
> "Processes" for compliance.

Jim, apparently you have not noticed that work on this issue has been
underway for quite some time. See:

  http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/2000-charter.html

for details. In particular, you'll want to look at the output of this group,
RFC 2626.

				Ned