ltru Discussion Archive - Thread Index

[Prev Page] [Next Page] [Date Index] [IETF Mailing List Directory] [ltru List Information]

• Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), (continued)
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Peter Constable
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Kent Karlsson
• [Ltru] Issue 63:, "Martin J. DÃrst"
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63:, Alexey Melnikov
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63:, "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63:, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63:, John Cowan
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63:, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63:, Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63:, Alexey Melnikov
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63:, Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63:, Peter Constable
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63: Replace %xgh with U+00gh in text, "Martin J. DÃrst"
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63: Replace %xgh with U+00gh in text, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63: Replace %xgh with U+00gh in text, "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63: Replace %xgh with U+00gh in text, Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63: Replace %xgh with U+00gh in text, Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63: Replace %xgh with U+00gh in text, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63: Replace %xgh with U+00gh in text, Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63: Replace %xgh with U+00gh in text, Alexey Melnikov
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63: Replace %xgh with U+00gh in text, "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63: Replace %xgh with U+00gh in text, "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63: Replace %xgh with U+00gh in text, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 63: Replace %xgh with U+00gh in text, Peter Constable
  • [Ltru] Issue #63: Replace %xgh with U+00gh in text, Randy Presuhn
• Re: [Ltru] Issue #60: Require IETF Last Call for 2.2.1 (5) primary subtag case (Apps #12-b), Randy Presuhn
• Re: [Ltru] Code/code element/codet, Doug Ewell
  • Re: [Ltru] Code/code element/codet, Randy Presuhn
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Code/code element/codet, Doug Ewell
• [Ltru] Schedule for this week, "Martin J. DÃrst"
• [Ltru] Code/code element/codetRE: Ltru Digest, Vol 52, Issue 7, Lang Gérard
• Re: [Ltru] #55: Section 1 role/history (Apps #8), Doug Ewell
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] #55: Section 1 role/history (Apps #8), Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] #55: Section 1 role/history (Apps #8), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] #55: Section 1 role/history (Apps #8), "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] #55: Section 1 role/history (Apps #8), "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] #55: Section 1 role/history (Apps #8), Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] #55: Section 1 role/history (Apps #8), Randy Presuhn
• Re: [Ltru] AD issue #14 (DoS potential) Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Doug Ewell
• Re: [Ltru] On "code" in ISO standards, Doug Ewell
  • Re: [Ltru] On "code" in ISO standards, Phillips, Addison
• Re: [Ltru] par 3 of 2.2, "identification of subtag's type", Doug Ewell
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] par 3 of 2.2, "identification of subtag's type", Doug Ewell
• Re: [Ltru] par 3 of 2.2, "identification of subtag's type" (was Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review), CE Whitehead
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] par 3 of 2.2, "identification of subtag's type" (was Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review), Alexey Melnikov
  • Re: [Ltru] par 3 of 2.2, "identification of subtag's type" (was Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review), Alexey Melnikov
    • Re: [Ltru] par 3 of 2.2, "identification of subtag's type" (was Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review), Phillips, Addison
      • Message not available
      • Message not available
      • Message not available
      • Re: [Ltru] par 3 of 2.2, "identification of subtag's type" (was Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review), CE Whitehead
      • Re: [Ltru] par 3 of 2.2, "identification of subtag's type" (was Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review), Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] par 3 of 2.2, "identification of subtag's type" (was Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review), Doug Ewell
  • Re: [Ltru] par 3 of 2.2, "identification of subtag's type" (was Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review), Alexey Melnikov
  • Re: [Ltru] par 3 of 2.2, "identification of subtag's type" (was Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review), CE Whitehead
• Re: [Ltru] Registering a primary language subtag (was: Additional issues with 4646bis...), Doug Ewell
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Registering a primary language subtag (was: Additional issues with 4646bis...), Alexey Melnikov
    • Re: [Ltru] Registering a primary language subtag (was: Additional issues with 4646bis...), Peter Constable
    • Re: [Ltru] Registering a primary language subtag (was: Additional issues with 4646bis...), Doug Ewell
• Re: [Ltru] Issue #40: AD #7 - section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs UN M.49, Doug Ewell
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #40: AD #7 - section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs UN M.49, Alexey Melnikov
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #40: AD #7 - section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs UN M.49, "Martin J. Dürst"
• [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Alexey Melnikov
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Kent Karlsson
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Alexey Melnikov
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Peter Constable
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Alexey Melnikov
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Doug Ewell
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Doug Ewell
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #43: AD #10 - section 5.1 vs 3.2 on File-Date value, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Followup on AD review of 4646bis, Alexey Melnikov
• Re: [Ltru] Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review,, Doug Ewell
• Re: [Ltru] Why so quiet?, Doug Ewell
• [Ltru] draft-23 is online..., Phillips, Addison
• [Ltru] In the interest of moving faster..., Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] In the interest of moving faster..., Peter Constable
    • Re: [Ltru] In the interest of moving faster..., Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] In the interest of moving faster..., Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] In the interest of moving faster..., Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] In the interest of moving faster..., Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] In the interest of moving faster..., Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] In the interest of moving faster..., Peter Constable
  • Re: [Ltru] In the interest of moving faster..., Phillips, Addison
• [Ltru] [Fwd: Fwd: Last Call: draft-ietf-opsawg-operations-and-management (Guidelines for Considering Operations and Management of New Protocols and Protocol Extensions) to BCP], "Martin J. Dürst"
• Re: [Ltru] Issue #54: section 3.7 requirements on maintainers of additional registries (Apps #7), Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #54: section 3.7 requirements on maintainers of additional registries (Apps #7), "Martin J. Dürst"
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #54: section 3.7 requirements on maintainers of additional registries (Apps #7), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #54: section 3.7 requirements on maintainers of additional registries (Apps #7), Randy Presuhn
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #54: section 3.7 requirements on maintainers of additional registries (Apps #7), Doug Ewell
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #54: section 3.7 requirements on maintainers of additional registries (Apps #7), CE Whitehead
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #54: section 3.7 requirements on maintainers of additional registries (Apps #7), Peter Constable
• Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Phillips, Addison
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Marion Gunn
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), "Martin J. Dürst"
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Peter Constable
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Mark Davis
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Peter Constable
• Re: [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5), Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5), Phillips, Addison
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5), Randy Presuhn
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5), Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5), "Martin J. DÃrst"
  • [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5), Doug Ewell
• Re: [Ltru] Issue #51: MAY in 2.2.4 (E) on Channel Islands (Apps #4), Randy Presuhn
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #51: MAY in 2.2.4 (E) on Channel Islands (Apps #4), Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #51: MAY in 2.2.4 (E) on Channel Islands (Apps #4), "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #51: MAY in 2.2.4 (E) on Channel Islands (Apps #4), Doug Ewell
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #51: MAY in 2.2.4 (E) on Channel Islands (Apps #4), Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #51: MAY in 2.2.4 (E) on Channel Islands (Apps #4), Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #51: MAY in 2.2.4 (E) on Channel Islands (Apps #4), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #51: MAY in 2.2.4 (E) on Channel Islands (Apps #4), "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #51: MAY in 2.2.4 (E) on Channel Islands (Apps #4), Randy Presuhn
• Re: [Ltru] Issue #50: Change registry format to XML (Apps #3), Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #50: Change registry format to XML (Apps #3), "Martin J. Dürst"
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #50: Change registry format to XML (Apps #3), Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #50: Change registry format to XML (Apps #3), "Martin J. DÃrst"
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #50: Change registry format to XML (Apps #3), Doug Ewell
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #50: Change registry format to XML (Apps #3), Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #50: Change registry format to XML (Apps #3), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #50: Change registry format to XML (Apps #3), Stephane Bortzmeyer
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #50: Change registry format to XML (Apps #3), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #50: Change registry format to XML (Apps #3), Randy Presuhn
• Re: [Ltru] Issue #49: Add reference to RFC 5198 (Apps #2), Randy Presuhn
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #49: Add reference to RFC 5198 (Apps #2), Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #49: Add reference to RFC 5198 (Apps #2), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #49: Add reference to RFC 5198 (Apps #2), "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #49: Add reference to RFC 5198 (Apps #2), Randy Presuhn
• Re: [Ltru] Issue #48 Hosting of mailing list (Apps #1), Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #48 Hosting of mailing list (Apps #1), Peter Constable
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #48 Hosting of mailing list (Apps #1), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #48 Hosting of mailing list (Apps #1), Randy Presuhn
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #48 Hosting of mailing list (Apps #1), Doug Ewell
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #48 Hosting of mailing list (Apps #1), CE Whitehead
• [Ltru] Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Alexey Melnikov
  • [Ltru] Issue #48 Hosting of mailing list (Apps #1), Randy Presuhn
  • [Ltru] Issue #49: Add reference to RFC 5198 (Apps #2), Randy Presuhn
    • [Ltru] Can a WG member update <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/> ? (Was: Issue #49: Add reference to RFC 5198 (Apps #2), Stephane Bortzmeyer
      • Re: [Ltru] Can a WG member update <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/> ? (Was: Issue #49: Add reference to RFC 5198 (Apps #2), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Can a WG member update <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/> ?, Randy Presuhn
  • [Ltru] Issue #50: Change registry format to XML (Apps #3), Randy Presuhn
  • [Ltru] Issue #51: MAY in 2.2.4 (E) on Channel Islands (Apps #4), Randy Presuhn
  • [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5), Randy Presuhn
  • [Ltru] Issue 53: Section 2.2.3 (2) is murky (Apps #6), Randy Presuhn
  • [Ltru] Issue #54: section 3.7 requirements on maintainers of additional registries (Apps #7), Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Alexey Melnikov
    • Re: [Ltru] Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Alexey Melnikov
      • [Ltru] On "code" in ISO standards, Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] On "code" in ISO standards, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] On "code" in ISO standards, Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] On "code" in ISO standards, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] On "code" in ISO standards, John Cowan
    • Re: [Ltru] Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Alexey Melnikov
      • Re: [Ltru] AD issue #14 (DoS potential) Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Phillips, Addison
      • [Ltru] Issue #62: (AD #14) DoS potential (was: Re: AD issue #14 (DoS potential) Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62: (AD #14) DoS potential (was: Re: AD issue #14 (DoS potential) Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62: (AD #14) DoS potential (was: Re: AD issue #14 (DoS potential) Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review), Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62: (AD #14) DoS potential (was: Re: AD issue #14 (DoS potential) Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62: (AD #14) DoS potential, "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62: (AD #14) DoS potential, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62: (AD #14) DoS potential, Alexey Melnikov
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62: (AD #14) DoS potential, "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62: (AD #14) DoS potential, Alexey Melnikov
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62: (AD #14) DoS potential, "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62: (AD #14) DoS potential, Alexey Melnikov
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62: (AD #14) DoS potential, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62, AD issue #14 (Very remote risk of DoS), Stephane Bortzmeyer
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62, AD issue #14 (Very remote risk of DoS), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #62, AD issue #14 (Very remote risk of DoS), Stephane Bortzmeyer
      • Re: [Ltru] AD issue #14 (DoS potential) Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Alexey Melnikov
      • Re: [Ltru] AD issue #14 (DoS potential) Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] AD issue #14 (DoS potential) Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Alexey Melnikov
      • Re: [Ltru] AD issue #14 (DoS potential) Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] AD issue #14 (DoS potential) Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, John Cowan
      • Re: [Ltru] Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Alexey Melnikov
      • [Ltru] Issue #62: (AD #14) DoS potential, Randy Presuhn
    • [Ltru] #55: Section 1 role/history (Apps #8), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] #55: Section 1 role/history (Apps #8), John Cowan
      • Re: [Ltru] #55: Section 1 role/history (Apps #8), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] #55: Section 1 role/history (Apps #8), "Martin J. Dürst"
    • [Ltru] Issue #56: Section 2.1 syntax is not restrictive enough (Apps #9), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #56: Section 2.1 syntax is not restrictive enough (Apps #9), John Cowan
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #56: Section 2.1 syntax is not restrictive enough (Apps #9), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #56: Section 2.1 syntax is not restrictive enough (Apps #9), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #56: Section 2.1 syntax is not restrictive enough (Apps #9), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #56: Section 2.1 syntax is not restrictive enough (Apps #9), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #56: Section 2.1 syntax is not restrictive enough (Apps #9), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #56: Section 2.1 syntax is not restrictive enough (Apps #9), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #56: Section 2.1 syntax is not restrictive enough (Apps #9), Randy Presuhn
    • [Ltru] Issue #57: Code / Subtag distinction (Apps #10), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #57: Code / Subtag distinction (Apps #10), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #57: Code / Subtag distinction (Apps #10), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #57: Code / Subtag distinction (Apps #10), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #57: Code / Subtag distinction (Apps #10), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #57: Code / Subtag distinction (Apps #10), "Martin J. Dürst"
    • [Ltru] Issue #58: Add a summary of rules for recognizing subtag type (Apps #11), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #58: Add a summary of rules for recognizing subtag type (Apps #11), John Cowan
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #58: Add a summary of rules for recognizing subtagtype (Apps #11), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #58: Add a summary of rules for recognizing subtagtype (Apps #11), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #58: Add a summary of rules for recognizing subtagtype (Apps #11), Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #58: Add a summary of rules for recognizing subtagtype (Apps #11), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #58: Add a summary of rules for recognizing subtagtype (Apps #11), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #58: Add a summary of rules for recognizing subtagtype (Apps #11), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #58: Add a summary of rules for recognizing subtagtype (Apps #11), Peter Constable
    • [Ltru] Issue #59: replace RECOMMENDED language with MUST language in 2.2.1 (Apps #12a), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #59: replace RECOMMENDED language with MUST languagein 2.2.1 (Apps #12a), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #59: replace RECOMMENDED language with MUST languagein 2.2.1 (Apps #12a), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #59: replace RECOMMENDED language with MUST languagein 2.2.1 (Apps #12a), "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #59: replace RECOMMENDED language with MUST languagein 2.2.1 (Apps #12a), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #59: replace RECOMMENDED language with MUST language in 2.2.1 (Apps #12a), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #59: replace RECOMMENDED language with MUST language in 2.2.1 (Apps #12a), Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #59: replace RECOMMENDED language with MUST language in 2.2.1 (Apps #12a), "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #59: replace RECOMMENDED language with MUST language in 2.2.1 (Apps #12a), Phillips, Addison
    • [Ltru] Issue #60: Require IETF Last Call for 2.2.1 (5) primary subtag case (Apps #12-b), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #60: Require IETF Last Call for 2.2.1 (5) primarysubtag case (Apps #12-b), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #60: Require IETF Last Call for 2.2.1 (5) primarysubtag case (Apps #12-b), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #60: Require IETF Last Call for 2.2.1 (5) primarysubtag case (Apps #12-b), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #60: Require IETF Last Call for 2.2.1 (5) primary subtag case (Apps #12-b), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #60: Require IETF Last Call for 2.2.1 (5) primary subtag case (Apps #12-b), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #60: Require IETF Last Call for 2.2.1 (5) primary subtag case (Apps #12-b), "Martin J. Dürst"
    • [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata (Apps #13), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13), "Martin J. DÃrst"
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Additional issues with 4646bis raised by an Apps Review Team review, Doug Ewell
• [Ltru] I-D Action:draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-22.txt, Internet-Drafts
• [Ltru] draft-22 submitted..., Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] draft-22 submitted..., "Martin J. Dürst"
    • Re: [Ltru] draft-22 submitted..., Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] editor copy progress..., Phillips, Addison
• [Ltru] Well-formed processors (was: Re: Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available), Doug Ewell
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Well-formed processors (was: Re: Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available), Doug Ewell
• [Ltru] Draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-22//Issue#40//Section 3.4-point 16, Lang Gérard
  • Re: [Ltru] Draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-22//Issue#40//Section 3.4-point 16, Peter Constable
• [Ltru] Editors, please produce draft-22, "Martin J. DÃrst"
  • Re: [Ltru] Editors, please produce draft-22, Phillips, Addison
    • Re: [Ltru] Editors, please produce draft-22, "Martin J. DÃrst"
• Re: [Ltru] [IANA #235907] Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis (Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Fw: [IANA #235907] Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis (Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] Fw: [IANA #235907] Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis (Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, John Cowan
    • Re: [Ltru] Fw: [IANA #235907] Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis (Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, Phillips, Addison
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Fw: [IANA #235907] Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis (Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] Fw: [IANA #235907] Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis (Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Fw: [IANA #235907] Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis(Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, Doug Ewell
      • Re: [Ltru] Fw: [IANA #235907] Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis(Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Fw: [IANA #235907] Last Call:draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis (Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Fw: [IANA #235233] Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis (Update to the Language Subtag Registry) to Informational RFC, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Fw: Alexey's Apps Area Activity Report for April 2009, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Randy Presuhn
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Leif Halvard Silli
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, CE Whitehead
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, CE Whitehead
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, CE Whitehead
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, CE Whitehead
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Mark Davis
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, CE Whitehead
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, CE Whitehead
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Doug Ewell
    • [Ltru] ABSOLUTELY intolerable, John Cowan
      • Re: [Ltru] ABSOLUTELY intolerable, Doug Ewell
      • [Ltru] Re-opening issue #40 (was: ABSOLUTELY intolerable), Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Re-opening issue #40 (was: ABSOLUTELY intolerable), Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] ABSOLUTELY intolerable, "Martin J. Dürst"
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, CE Whitehead
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, "Martin J. Dürst"
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Doug Ewell
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, CE Whitehead
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available, Randy Presuhn
      • [Ltru] Ticket #53 resolution?, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #53 resolution?, Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #53 resolution?, Phillips, Addison
      • [Ltru] Why so quiet?, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Why so quiet?, Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #53 resolution?, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #53 resolution?, Peter Constable
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #53 resolution?, "Martin J. DÃrst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #53 resolution?, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Section 3.4-16 on ISO 3166 vs UN M49 RE: Ltru Digest, Vol 50, Issue 42, Lang Gérard
  • Re: [Ltru] Section 3.4-16 on ISO 3166 vs UN M49 RE: Ltru Digest, Vol 50, Issue 42, Randy Presuhn
    • Re: [Ltru] Section 3.4-16 on ISO 3166 vs UN M49 RE: Ltru Digest, Vol 50, Issue 42, John Cowan
      • [Ltru] Issue 40: Re: Section 3.4-16 on ISO 3166 vs UN M49 RE: Ltru Digest, Vol 50, Issue 42, "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Issue 40: Re: Section 3.4-16 on ISO 3166 vs UN M49, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] zh-Latn-CN-variant1-a-extend1-x-wadegile, Kent Karlsson
  • Re: [Ltru] zh-Latn-CN-variant1-a-extend1-x-wadegile, Phillips, Addison
    • Re: [Ltru] zh-Latn-CN-variant1-a-extend1-x-wadegile, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] zh-Latn-CN-variant1-a-extend1-x-wadegile, Kent Karlsson
• [Ltru] Issue summary, Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue summary, Phillips, Addison
• [Ltru] It MUST and SHALL be preserved, John Cowan
  • Re: [Ltru] It MUST and SHALL be preserved, Randy Presuhn
    • Re: [Ltru] It MUST and SHALL be preserved, John Cowan
• [Ltru] [OT] Language icon, Stephane Bortzmeyer
  • Re: [Ltru] [OT] Language icon, John Cowan
• [Ltru] can't find a reference for ticket #31, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] can't find a reference for ticket #31, Randy Presuhn
    • Re: [Ltru] can't find a reference for ticket #31, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] can't find a reference for ticket #31, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] can't find a reference for ticket #31, "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] can't find a reference for ticket #31, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] can't find a reference for ticket #31, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] can't find a reference for ticket #31, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Ticket #42: AD Issue #9: confusing future tense, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #42: AD Issue #9: confusing future tense, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Ticket #41: AD Issue #8: section 3.5 SHOULD vs. MUST, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #41: AD Issue #8: section 3.5 SHOULD vs. MUST, John Cowan
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #41: AD Issue #8: section 3.5 SHOULD vs. MUST, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #41: AD Issue #8: section 3.5 SHOULD vs. MUST, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #41: AD Issue #8: section 3.5 SHOULD vs. MUST, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Ticket #39: AD Issues #6: field name occurance limit, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #39: AD Issues #6: field name occurance limit, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Ticket #47: AD Issue #14: section 3.1.2 confusing text on replacement tags, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #47: AD Issue #14: section 3.1.2 confusing text on replacement tags, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Ticket #46: AD Issue #13: MAY->can in 4.6, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #46: AD Issue #13: MAY->can in 4.6, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Mark Davis
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, John Cowan
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Phillips, Addison
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, John Cowan
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5extlang mapping, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Mark Davis
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Mark Davis
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, CE Whitehead
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, CE Whitehead
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, CE Whitehead
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Kent Karlsson
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5extlang mapping, Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Doug Ewell
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Doug Ewell
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Doug Ewell
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: AD Issue #12: reason for SHOULD in 4.5 extlang mapping, Mark Davis
• [Ltru] Ticket #44: AD Issue #11: informative reference to MIME, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #44: AD Issue #11: informative reference to MIME, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Ticket #43: AD Issue #10: File-Date value, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #43: AD Issue #10: File-Date value, Randy Presuhn
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #43: AD Issue #10: File-Date value, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #43: AD Issue #10: File-Date value, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs. UN M.49, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs. UN M.49, Randy Presuhn
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs. UN M.49, Phillips, Addison
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs. UN M.49, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs. UN M.49, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs. UN M.49, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs. UNM.49, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs. UNM.49, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs. UNM.49, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs.UNM.49, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs.UNM.49, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs. UNM.49, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs. UN M.49, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #40: AD Issue #7: section 3.4 on ISO 3166 vs. UN M.49, Phillips, Addison
• [Ltru] Ticket #37: AD Issue #4: delete last sentence in Section 2.2.9, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #37: AD Issue #4: delete last sentence in Section2.2.9, Randy Presuhn
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #37: AD Issue #4: delete last sentence in Section2.2.9, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #37: AD Issue #4: delete last sentence inSection2.2.9, Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #37: AD Issue #4: delete last sentence in Section 2.2.9, "Martin J. Dürst"
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #37: AD Issue #4: delete last sentence in Section 2.2.9, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #37: AD Issue #4: delete last sentence in Section 2.2.9, Randy Presuhn
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #37: AD Issue #4: delete last sentence in Section 2.2.9, Phillips, Addison
• [Ltru] Ticket #36: AD Issue #3: rules for UN M.49 codes, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #36: AD Issue #3: rules for UN M.49 codes, Randy Presuhn
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #36: AD Issue #3: rules for UN M.49 codes, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #36: AD Issue #3: rules for UN M.49 codes, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Ticket #35, AD Issue #2: what is meant by "permanently reserved", Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #35, AD Issue #2: what is meant by "permanently reserved", Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Ticket #34, AD Issue #1: who scrutinizes primary subtags rejected by ISO 639/RA-JAC, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #34, AD Issue #1: who scrutinizes primary subtags rejected by ISO 639/RA-JAC, Randy Presuhn
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #34, AD Issue #1: who scrutinizes primary subtags rejected by ISO 639/RA-JAC, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #34, AD Issue #1: who scrutinizes primary subtags rejected by ISO 639/RA-JAC, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Ticket #38, AD issue #5: ABNF vs UTF-8, Phillips, Addison
  • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #38, AD issue #5: ABNF vs UTF-8, "Martin J. Dürst"
    • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #38, AD issue #5: ABNF vs UTF-8, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #38, AD issue #5: ABNF vs UTF-8, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #38, AD issue #5: ABNF vs UTF-8, Mark Davis
      • Re: [Ltru] Ticket #38, AD issue #5: ABNF vs UTF-8, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Fw: 75th IETF - Working Group/BOF Scheduling, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Fw: Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis (Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, Randy Presuhn
  • Re: [Ltru] Fw: Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis (Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, Phillips, Addison
    • Re: [Ltru] Fw: Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis (Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, "Martin J. Dürst"
      • Re: [Ltru] Fw: Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis (Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, Phillips, Addison
      • Re: [Ltru] Fw: Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis (Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Fw: Review of draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-10, Randy Presuhn
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • [Ltru] Fw: Review of draft-ietf-ltru-4645bis-10, Randy Presuhn
• [Ltru] Last Call: draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis (Tags for Identifying Languages) to BCP, The IESG
• Re: [Ltru] Issue #43 (AD comment #10) section 5.1 vs 3.2 on file-date value, Doug Ewell
• Re: [Ltru] Issue #46 (AD comment 13) MAY -> can in section 4.6, CE Whitehead
• Re: [Ltru] Issue #36 (AD comment #3) rules for UN M.49 codes, CE Whitehead
• Re: [Ltru] Issue #45 (AD comment #12) SHOULD in section 4.5 on preferred value mappings, Doug Ewell
• Re: [Ltru] Issue #41 (AD comment #8) section 3.5 SHOULD vs MUST, Doug Ewell
  • Re: [Ltru] Issue #41 (AD comment #8) section 3.5 SHOULD vs MUST, Mark Davis
    • Re: [Ltru] Issue #41 (AD comment #8) section 3.5 SHOULD vs MUST, Doug Ewell