MrElveyScratchSpace
From FastMailWiki
MrElveyScratchSpace is for wiki work in progress.
Broken
(ToDo's)
- Special:Uncategorizedimages
- TableOfContents
- Images don't work, e.g. FastMail, MrElvey. Don't know how to fix. Perhaps it was disabled by an admin intentionally. Image (and file) upload has been disabled (http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:%24wgEnableUploads) on this wiki.
IETF Stuff
Security Area Director(s): Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu> Security Area Advisor: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Applications Area Director(s):
Ted Hardie <hardie@qualcomm.com>
Scott Hollenbeck <sah@428cobrajet.net> (Verisign)
Applications Area Advisor:
Scott Hollenbeck <sah@428cobrajet.net> (Verisign)
MTA Authorization Records in DNS (MARID) (ex-)Chairs:
Marshall Rose
Andrew Newton anewton@verisignlabs.com; andy@hxr.us
Chairs by year, with affiliations: http://www.ietf.org/iesg.html --- old junk:
Something changed within the past week (after the big wiki software upgrade announced about 2 weeks ago) to break the images on MrElvey. -MrElvey
How to unblacklist yourself using CSV landing page workspace
(This is an early draft- DO NOT use this URL in real code/configurations) Hi. Presumably, you arrived at this page after your mail bounced, and you want to know why, and what you can do about it. We use blacklists/blocklists to avoid receiving spam... If you want us to accept your mail, just create a CSV record for your mail server, or have your ISP set it up, if you use their mail server, and we'll immediately stop blocking your mail. You probably want to make an effort get out of the blacklist as well, but setting up a CSV record is another option we provide, that you'll probably find to be a quicker solution.
Recovered from some edits by Kander
Wiki Conventions (other suggestions to FeatureSuggestionsWiki)
- SUGGESTED WIKI STYLE CONVENTION: When a second person posts a reply within a previous Wiki entry, use underscore or equal sign before and after entry (causing italics and Monospaced Font, respectively). For example This is planned for implementation very soon. Great! You can also identify comments by setting them apart from the text by blank lines and/or indents, since entries are separated by
----
line breaks? OTOH, ThreadModeConsideredHarmful.
Documentation and FAQ
Regarding http://www.fastmail.fm/docs/comingenhancements.html
- It doesn't include a link to this page / FeatureSuggestions.
- suggest AT messagingengine DOT com should be munged or at least protected with the "%40" and "@" tricks. Strange that "This <(FeatureSuggestions)> is definitely the best place to put suggestions," but there's still no link to FeatureSuggestions! Ah, maybe it's because of cobranding. No, I think the SGML allows it to not be on the cobranded pages.
What follows are some pages from the asrg wiki (temp. unavail.)
HomePage - http://asrg.sp.am/wiki/?ASRG_Wiki
This Wiki is intended to complement the work of the ASRG. Some stuff also was at here but has been moved over.
FILTERING Subgroup
- Filtering Standards
SMTP-VERIFY Subgroup
- Web of Trust for Email
- Reputation and Accreditation Systems
MXCOMP (i.e. MARID/LMAP) WG (this is an IETF WG)
- OpinionMatrix
- Client SMTP Validation (CSV) Links, advocacy and comparisons.
IMPORTANT: Any contributions to this page, unless otherwise stated will be treated in accordance with the regular IRTF, IETF and ASRG IPR policies. Additionally, by contributing information to this page, you agree that your contributions may be used in ASRG discussions and documents.
http://asrg.sp.am/wiki?ClientSMTPValidation :
#CSV - Content moved to ClientSmtpValidation.
Reputation And Accreditation Systems
ASRG Wiki | RecentChanges | Preferences Moved from http://www.shaftek.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Reputation_And_Accreditation_Systems
This page is intended for document the ongoing discussions on a "reputation and accreditation systems" in the ASRG's SMTP Session Verification subgroup and ASRG's main discussion list. It is expected that this document will eventually end up being an Internet draft.
IMPORTANT: Any contributions to this page, unless otherwise stated will be treated in accordance with the regular IRTF, IETF and ASRG IPR policies. Additionally, by contributing information to this page, you agree that your contributions may be used in ASRG discussions and documents.
Below is a summary of the discussions regarding the concept of a "reputation and accreditation systems" and some of the issues that were raised. Feel free to add your opinions.
Filtering Standards
Moved from http://www.shaftek.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Filtering_Standards
This page is intended for document the ongoing discussions on a filtering standards in the ASRG's http://asrg.sp.am/subgroups/filtering.shtml Filtering subgroup . This document is intended eventually to become an Internet draft. (http://millenix.zemos.net/asrg-filtering/ draft-irtf-asrg-filtering-header ) http://zarquon.advenge.com/RFCwiki/view?doc=AF the draft loaded into an experimental shared editing environment you will need to log in to see it, no salesmen will call. Reload after logging in.
Link to the mail archive: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.asrg.filtering/
IMPORTANT: Any contributions to this page, unless otherwise stated will be treated in accordance with the regular IRTF, IETF and ASRG IPR policies. Additionally, by contributing information to this page, you agree that your contributions may be used in ASRG discussions and documents.
Below is a summary of the discussions, feel free to add your opinions.
- /Issues_Raised - some of the issues raised in the discussions
- Potential Work Items
- /Filtered_Header
- /Purposesforheaders
- /Trusting_headers
- /Upstream_Communication - MUA to MTA
- /Scenarios - scenarios of e-mail transport and delivery and where different kinds of filters fit in
- /Filter_Types - names of different types of filters for use in http://www.shaftek.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Filtering_Standards/Scenarios the scenarios page
- /Glossary
- /RequirementsforOfftheshelfUpstreamBayesiantuningreccomendation_interoperability
- /OutOfScope -- realms explicitly off topic at this time
for participants: a /QuickStartGuide with how to operate this thing, for those who have never used a wiki before.
Web Of Trust For Email
ASRG Wiki | RecentChanges | Preferences Moved from http://www.shaftek.org/wiki/wiki.pl?WebOfTrustForEmail
This page is intended for document the ongoing discussions on a "web of trust" in the ASRG's SMTP Session Verification subgroup. It is expected that this document will eventually end up being an Internet draft.
IMPORTANT: Any contributions to this page, unless otherwise stated will be treated in accordance with the regular IRTF, IETF and ASRG IPR policies. Additionally, by contributing information to this page, you agree that your contributions may be used in ASRG discussions and documents.
Below is a summary of the discussions regarding the concept of a "web of trust" and some of the issues that were raised. Feel free to add your opinions.
- /Problem Statement
- /Cost Vs Benefit?
- /Defining Identity
- /Defining Trust
- /Scaling Issues
- /Privacy Issues
- /Securing From Spammers
Foo
Other pages will be available at http://www.google.com/search?hlen&lr&ieUTF-8&safeoff&q=+site:asrg.sp.am+%22asrg.sp.am/wiki%3F*%22
- r a short while.
at www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/dtis/tech_connect/TechConnectPreRFICMtgAttendees083105.doc is that supposed to be chris@sbc.com or chairs@sbc.com? odd: Kathy Carlson Cingular ron.gillette@cingular.com
Science
Why study Physics? Put String Theory on the backburner?
The following is from http://quantumfuture.net/quantum_future/bogdanov2.htm .
Physics is what physicists do. And physicists do what they are paid to do. This is one of the reasons why so many of the brightest minds work on a short-time-scale reward basis, doing what is fashionable at a given time. This is the main reason why there is no progress at all in the fundamental areas. The clash between Einstein's relativity theories - which describe classical gravity at macro-scales, and Bohr-Dirac-Heisenberg-Schroedinger quantum theories, providing phenomenology of micro-phenomena, - this clash is today even more dark and scary than it was seventy years ago.
There is no real progress.
Quantum Theory is supposed to be the greatest invention in science since the beginning of the study of deeper realities. The greatest success of Quantum Theory is considered to be Quantum Field Theory, such as the theory of a quantized electromagnetic field (photons) in interaction with quantized charged matter (electrons). The problem is, this theory is mathematically inconsistent. It involves wishful thinking rather than rigorous science! The only quantum field theories (in four dimensional space-time) that ARE free of contradictions, are so-called trivial ones; that is theories that describe particles that do not interact at all. These theories are mathematical exercises involving particles that are "dead," that will never form atoms. It seems to be that a universe that is governed by quantum field theories that are free of contradictions would be a dead universe, a universe of no interaction.
One can build a non-trivial quantum field theory, which may even describe something real or interesting, but then it would necessarily contradict Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity; it would be a non-relativistic one.
This is the dilemma. If you want to have both Quantum Field Theory AND Einstein's Theory of Relativity, then you've got a problem.
Thus, nontrivial relativistic quantum field theories in four space-time dimensions are divergent - they lead to infinities, and are mathematically inconsistent. Searching for the cure in fancy formal math (supersymmetry, superstrings, quantum groups) just does not work. New - fundamentally new - ideas are needed. Quantum theory is not understood at all - everyone is trying to "cook" by "changing" the recipes to suit the ingredients they have on hand, and this very often results in "Rock Soup."
Part of the present-day problem is that Niels Bohr succeeded in molding the minds of so many theoretical physicists into the "no need to understand" mode and this has done a great disservice to the science, the new generations of scientists, and most of all, to humanity. In this day and time, it could be said, that we more desperately need to understand the Order of the Universe than ever before!
Yet there is hope. There are areas, even in the "recognized physics" where NEW is still possible. And, it is possible because more and more physicists understand how little they understand about quantum theory. Physicists are realizing, little by little, that even in such established areas as macroscopic electrodynamics there are problems that need major new rethinking: railguns, exploding wire arcs, sonoluminescence, present us with problems that are not easily answered within the standard paradigm and need, perhaps, a major re-thinking of the foundations.
Some of the problems are that we do not really understand the physics of conductivity and superconductivity. We realize that macroscopic quantum effects are more common than we ever thought. Sure, it is evident to everyone who goes to Circuit City that technology is progressing pretty fast in these areas; but the same cannot be said about our understanding!
What about gravitational physics?
Many of the important questions are still unanswered. The old Mach principle is still a subject of serious debate and we do not know what to do with singularities like black holes. They badly need quantum physics, but, once again, quantum physics becomes inconsistent when married with gravity. So we really do not know where we are.
We do not know if gravity is a fundamental force or, perhaps, it is a collective and composite phenomenon. Some physicists want to explain electromagnetism in terms of gravity. Others want to derive gravity from electromagnetism.
There is a lot of talk about antigravity or gravity shielding at the most fundamental levels and perhaps "antigravity" or gravity shielding is a real effect? No one can agree, and little progress is being made except to disagree. You would be amazed at the battles that rage in the ivory towers of academia!
We do not even know (at least not from textbooks or physics journals) if antimatter is attracted or repelled by matter. Perhaps tachyons - particles travelling faster than light - do exist? Perhaps space-time can have causal loops and telephoning into the past is possible? Perhaps quantum tunneling phenomena involves sending information faster than light? Perhaps magnetic monopoles exist and play an important role in biological systems? Or, perhaps, the fifth dimension is more than just a mathematical device of providing a unified description of gravity and electromagnetism?
Who knows?
All these topics ARE discussed in professional journals, but with no conclusion, no agreement, no cigar.
Mine/Google not finding/I submitted but google ignoring
WikiPedia:Fair_Credit_Billing_Act
WikiSource:CPUC_formal_complaint_forms (no InterWiki link yet. :( )
