Re: Fwd: Re: IP: Microsoft breaks Mime specification

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fwd: Re: IP: Microsoft breaks Mime specification

To: Ed Gerck <egerck at NMA.COM>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: IP: Microsoft breaks Mime specification
From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 03:38:19 +0100
Cc: ietf at ietf.org
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020122085259.03a98008@127.0.0.1> <v04220813b8735cc508d1@[192.168.1.14]> <039201c1a389$eb0ed770$0301000a@FATORA> <3C4E0AC7.993D52B5@nma.com>
Sender: owner-ietf at ietf.org

> Perhaps we all agree that standardization without some sort of conformance
> verification is ineffective.

can you read this mail?  consider what it took to get it to you.  how did
that happen?

randy

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Fwd: Re: IP: Microsoft breaks Mime specification
  - From: Keith Moore
- Re: Fwd: Re: IP: Microsoft breaks Mime specification
  - From: Christopher Evans
- conformance != enforcement, Re: Fwd: Re: IP: Microsoft breaks Mime specification
  - From: Ed Gerck

References:
- Re: Fwd: Re: IP: Microsoft breaks Mime specification
  - From: Einar Stefferud
- Re: Fwd: Re: IP: Microsoft breaks Mime specification
  - From: Marshall T. Rose
- Re: Fwd: Re: IP: Microsoft breaks Mime specification
  - From: Ed Gerck

Prev by Date: how do we do conformance?
Next by Date: conformance != enforcement, Re: Fwd: Re: IP: Microsoft breaks Mime specification
Previous by thread: Re: Fwd: Re: IP: Microsoft breaks Mime specification
Next by thread: conformance != enforcement, Re: Fwd: Re: IP: Microsoft breaks Mime specification
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.