Standards Compliant Mail Client Re: V6 still not supported Re: 202203211201.AYC
Hi, Blake: 1) " so it's not a chore to tell what thread you're even replying to? ": I am lost by your statement. I start each of my reply by quoting a phrase or sentence of the message that I am responding to. To be sure the original message in included, I copy the last message following what I am writing. I also prefix it with the forum message tag such as in this case "NANOG Digest, Vol 170, Issue 20 Message: 33 ". This should be enough for anyone to follow in the latest exchange, as well as tracing it back in history from the NANOG Digest, if interested. Anything more could I do to ease your efforts without beginning to create a long tail to a thread? 2) " ... a standards compliant mail client ... ": Please name the "standards" and list a couple software that comply with it. This is a topic that I am actually very interested in studying because eMails these days come in too many formats / styles. Please teach me. Thanks, Abe (2022-03-21 12:20) On 2022-03-20 19:01, Blake Dunlap wrote:
Can you get a standards compliant mail client so it's not a chore to tell what thread you're even replying to?
On Fri, Mar 18, 2022, 11:44 Abraham Y. Chen <aychen@avinta.com> wrote:
Dear Borg:
1) " ... I dont see a way of extending IPv4 without making it a new protocol. ... new IP protocol that is much more similar to IPv4, just extends address space. ... ": I believe that you will be pleasantly surprised at the proposal summarized by the the below whitepaper. It proposes an overlay architecture over the current Internet. As such, assignable IPv4 addresses are extended without the baggage of the current Internet and no new protocol. To begin the deployment, all need be done is "*/disabling/* the program code that has been */disabling/* the use of the 240/4 netblock" in routers.
https://www.avinta.com/phoenix-1/home/RevampTheInternet.pdf
2) The "transition" will be mostly transparent from ordinary users' point of view, because IoTs do not need be reprogrammed. Please feel free to ask me to describe specific issues that you may come across.
Regards,
Abe (2022-03-18 12:43)
------------------------------ NANOG Digest, Vol 170, Issue 20
Message: 33 Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2022 09:36:40 +0100 (CET) From:borg@uu3.net To:nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: V6 still not supported Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.2203180928500.16585@cube> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
While Im dont like IPv6, I see it as a bad idea. >From my knowledge I dont see a way of extending IPv4 without making it a new protocol. It was not designed that way.
What I would LOVE to see that someone will pop in with new IP protocol that is much more similar to IPv4, just extends address space and fixes some well know issues. (for example remove netmask and use prefixlen/CIDR).
Other importand aspect is some kind of IPvX -> IPv4 interop, so you can quickly put clients into new protocol and they have access to entire IPv4 internet out of the box.
Also, we need to please enterprises so we need largish RFC1918 space too.
Just my 2 cents again
---------- Original message ----------
From: Matt Hoppes<mattlists@rivervalleyinternet.net> <mailto:mattlists@rivervalleyinternet.net> To: Joe Maimon<jmaimon@jmaimon.com> <mailto:jmaimon@jmaimon.com>,bzs@theworld.com, Tom Beecher<beecher@beecher.cc> <mailto:beecher@beecher.cc> Cc: NANOG<nanog@nanog.org> <mailto:nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: V6 still not supported Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2022 23:34:19 -0500
At this point I would**love** to see IPv4 get extended, a software patch applied to devices, and IPv6 die a quick painless death.
Its not impossible to envision that IPv4 does not ever go away but actually gets extended in such a way that it obsoletes IPv6. The longer this drags out the less implausible it seems.
Joe
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon> Virus-free. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=link>
<#m_-5998402233395781358_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
-- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
On 3/21/22 10:21 AM, Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
1) " so it's not a chore to tell what thread you're even replying to? ": I am lost by your statement.
Abe, all of your replies that I've seen in the past few days have been brand new threads (or possibly replies to yourself). None of your replies have been properly threaded by my email client. This is in contrast to almost all of the other messages that I see on the NANOG mailing list, which do thread properly.
I start each of my reply by quoting a phrase or sentence of the message that I am responding to. To be sure the original message in included, I copy the last message following what I am writing. I also prefix it with the forum message tag such as in this case "NANOG Digest, Vol 170, Issue 20 Message: 33 ".
I'm now speculating that you are subscribed to the "digest" version of the mailing list instead of receiving individual messages. Glancing at the headers, it appears as if NANOG is hosted on a Mailman mailing list. As such, I believe that you could change your subscription to use MIME formatted digest, which should include more proper RFC-822 copies of the messages. I believe that you could then reply to these individual messages directly and match the threading that I mentioned above. The problem with digests is that they are brand new messages / threads. So replies to message text therein replies to a message that most of us don't receive (the digest message).
This should be enough for anyone to follow in the latest exchange, as well as tracing it back in history from the NANOG Digest, if interested. Anything more could I do to ease your efforts without beginning to create a long tail to a thread?
Prior to the message that I'm replying to, I was not aware that you were replying to the digest. Those of us that receive individual messages as opposed to the digest don't have any visibility into the digest volume number, issue number, nor message number. For all intents and purposes it might as well be the "the 4th message that passed my spam filter after my last payday". As for the copy of the message that you're including, I wasn't aware you were even doing that because you appear to be top posting and I wasn't seeing anything below your signature. I'd encourage you to look at the MIME formatted digest where you can reply to copies of the original messages and maintain threading. Also, please consider not top posting. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
On 3/21/22 1:57 PM, Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote:
Glancing at the headers, it appears as if NANOG is hosted on a Mailman mailing list. As such, I believe that you could change your subscription to use MIME formatted digest, which should include more proper RFC-822 copies of the messages. I believe that you could then reply to these individual messages directly and match the threading that I mentioned above.
I confirm this would work for the nanog list. IMHO, digest is not the right mode to subscribe if you intend to post replies to the list. -- Bryan Fields 727-409-1194 - Voice http://bryanfields.net
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 9:22 AM Abraham Y. Chen <aychen@avinta.com> wrote:
1) " so it's not a chore to tell what thread you're even replying to? ": I am lost by your statement. I start each of my reply by quoting a phrase or sentence of the message that I am responding to.
You've created 18 mail threads in the last 14 days and they're all basically on the same topic. Something about your mailer or the way you're using it has made a mess. You're top-posting, which is against the mailing list conventions (trim and quote inline). You're back to putting changing date stamps in the subject lines (do you understand that email already has a date header?) You're posting in this weird enormous html font. Basically if you're trying to rub people the wrong way before they even read your first word, the only thing you could do worse is capitalize every letter. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill@herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/
participants (4)
-
Abraham Y. Chen -
Bryan Fields -
Grant Taylor -
William Herrin