Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal

From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 07:09:50 -0400

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] 
> [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Andrew Sullivan
> Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 3:22 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
> 
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 09:23:04AM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> > 
> > NEW:
> > Service messages SHOULD be created for passive clients 
> affected by an
> > action on an object.  Service messages MAY also be created 
> for active
> 
> The SHOULD here makes me slightly nervous, but I don't have any
> principled objection.  I still think the mechanism is pretty
> inflexible, but this SHOULD gives me enough room, I think, to move if
> I have to.

Didn't you yourself suggest a SHOULD?:

http://www.cafax.se/ietf-provreg/maillist/2005-08/msg00053.html

> The third paragraph of the existing 2.9.2.3 also has this:
> 
> ---cut here---
> Servers MAY implement other mechanisms to dequeue and deliver
> messages if queue maintenance needs exceed server resource
> consumption limits.
> ---cut here---
> 
> We could take the conditional clause away, to yield, "Servers
> MAY implement other mechanisms to dequeue and deliver messages."
> That would again be consistent with the old language, and coupled
> with the changes Scott has suggested, would lead to a looser
> understanding of what the poll mechanism requires.

...but we already have suggest new text to make it clear that
alternatives are possible:

"Other methods of server-client action notification, such as offline
reporting, are also
possible and are beyond the scope of this specification."

The text in 2.9.2.3 exists to let people know that they can deal with
clients that don't retrieve queued messages however they wish.
Something to make that clear really should remain in the document.

-Scott-

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 10:44:33 -0400

> Didn't you yourself suggest a SHOULD?:

I did (although I regret it in retrospect).  But as I said, I don't
object.

> Something to make that clear really should remain in the document.

Ok, I see that.  I don't have a strong opinion here, either.

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 10:44:33 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

> Didn't you yourself suggest a SHOULD?:

I did (although I regret it in retrospect).  But as I said, I don't
object.

> Something to make that clear really should remain in the document.

Ok, I see that.  I don't have a strong opinion here, either.

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 07:09:50 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: "Andrew Sullivan" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

-Scott-

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 06:48:09 +0100
From: "Halperin"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Men's essentials. All in one place.

--=_190cc757ff80edad56210052a6b47491
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><head></head><body><table border=3D0 cellpadding=3D0 cellspacing=3D0>=
<tr><td><a href=3D"http://vhoum.vayohwd5s9vc95y.adcomakerkk.com/?hlsioeqg">=
<img src=3D"cid:f158b5d5aaeca43bd9d738ca6af0a883" border=3D0></a></td></tr>=
<tr><td><a href=3D"http://vhoum.vayohwd5s9vc95y.adcomakerkk.com/?hlsioeqg">=
<img src=3D"cid:922d19d4d513848d03937e619590592a" border=3D0></a></td></tr>=
<tr><td bgcolor=3Dsilver height=3D1></td></tr><tr><td><a href=3D"http://www=
wekrai.com/pt/?30&jwewhjdw"><img src=3D"cid:3e1500bf759b20922fa447977ac2bc=
8a" border=3D0></a></td></tr><tr><td><a href=3D"http://www.wekrai.com/pt/?3=
0&jwewhjdw"><img src=3D"cid:0d53aba006b3b3fbe4e0849b371ead19" border=3D0></=
a></td></tr><tr><td bgcolor=3Dsilver height=3D1></td></tr><tr><td><a href=
=3D"http://okelee.mtemlik.info/?obnwsixwntvyapbhlbzpoaovcal"><img src=3D"ci=
d:7b9de1e3ba4fe010cba163353acbebd2" border=3D0></a></td></tr><tr><td><a hre=
f=3D"http://okelee.mtemlik.info/?obnwsixwntvyapbhlbzpoaovcal"><img src=3D"c=
id:c28e4b56bf7c751164f66045db7e7d21" border=3D0></a></td></tr></table></bod></html>
--=_190cc757ff80edad56210052a6b47491
Content-Type: image/gif
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="366f55ae58fcfef878171308cb82d405.gif"
Content-ID: <3e1500bf759b20922fa447977ac2bc8a>

--=_190cc757ff80edad56210052a6b47491
Content-Type: image/gif
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="6e7ebdc2bde67a21b3fc74c913e8ca22.gif"
Content-ID: <c28e4b56bf7c751164f66045db7e7d21>

--=_190cc757ff80edad56210052a6b47491
Content-Type: image/gif
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="74b49242dee15452d336e4cf696a116c.gif"
Content-ID: <f158b5d5aaeca43bd9d738ca6af0a883>

--=_190cc757ff80edad56210052a6b47491
Content-Type: image/gif
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="d222c405c90c5707a3359eb2a108ee3a.gif"
Content-ID: <0d53aba006b3b3fbe4e0849b371ead19>

--=_190cc757ff80edad56210052a6b47491
Content-Type: image/gif
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="f926f2cdb45aa6142d17dbb40d748266.gif"
Content-ID: <922d19d4d513848d03937e619590592a>

--=_190cc757ff80edad56210052a6b47491
Content-Type: image/gif
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="f9cccb0648edb03b2ae36819191acc20.gif"
Content-ID: <7b9de1e3ba4fe010cba163353acbebd2>

--=_190cc757ff80edad56210052a6b47491--
--=_a4e88786d37ba90ad177b9146604ecb4--

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 06:48:07 +0100
From: "Adler"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: We offer a variety of different licenses and discounts that can help you get the most out of its software budget 

<html><head><style tpe=text/css>.eyebrow { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: uppercase; COLOR: #ffffff; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.eyebrow:link { TEXT-DECORATION: none }</style><title>s</title><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"><meta content=ssss name=ssss><meta content=ssss name=ssss><style type=text/css>.serif { FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-FAMILY: times,serif } .sans { FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .small { FONT-SIZE: x-small; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .h1 { FONT-SIZE: small; COLOR: #cc6600; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .h3color { FONT-SIZE: x-small; COLOR: #cc6600; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .tiny { FONT-SIZE: xx-small; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica, sans-serif } .listprice { FONT-SIZE: x-small; FONT-FAMILY: arial,verdana,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: line-through } .price { FONT-SIZE: x-small; COLOR: #990000; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .tinyprice { FONT-SIZE: xx-small; COLOR: #990000; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .attention { BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffd5 } .eyebrow { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: uppercase; COLOR: #ffffff; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.eyebrow:link { TEXT-DECORATION: none }</style><meta content=ssss name=ssss></head><body text=#000000 vLink=#996633 aLink=#FF9933 link=#003399 bgColor=#FFFFFF><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=705 border=0><div align=left></table><table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 style="border-collapse: collapse" bordercolor=#111111 width=699 id=AutoNumber4 height=38><tr><td width=368 height=38><font face=Verdana size=2>Opt-in Email Special Offer&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </font><font face=Verdana size=1>&nbsp;<a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>unsubscribe me</a></font></td><td width=331 height=38><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <img border=0 src=http:/
/g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/nav/personalized/cartwish/right-topnav-default-2.gif align=right width=300 height=22></a></td></tr></table></div><tbody><tr><td class=small align=middle bgColor=#ffffdd width=707></td></tr></tbody></table><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=704 border=0><tr><td vAlign=top width=166><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><tr vAlign=bottom align=middle><td><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=155 border=0><tr vAlign=top bgColor=#333399><td width=5 bgcolor=#000080> <img src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-left-corner.gif width=5 height=5></td><td bgcolor=#000080><table cellSpacing=3 cellPadding=0 width=99% border=0><tr><td vAlign=bottom> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica color=#ffffff size=1> <b>SEARCH</b></font></td></tr></table></td><td align=right width=5 bgcolor=#000080> <img src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-right-corner.gif width=5 height=5></td></tr></table></td></tr><tr vAlign=top align=middle><td><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width=155 bgColor=#cccc99 border=0><tr><td width=100%><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=4 width=100% bgColor=#cccc99 border=0><tr><td vAlign=top width=100% bgColor=#eeeecc> <select name=url> <option selected>Software</option> </select> <input size=13 name=field-keywords> <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <input type=image alt=Go src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif align=middle value=Go border=0 name=Go width=21 height=21></a> </form></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><br><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=155 bgColor=#eeeecc border=0><tr vAlign=bottom align=middle><td><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=155 border=0><tr vAlign=top bgColor=#333399><td width=5 bgcolor=#000080><font size=1> <img src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-left-corner.gif width=5 height=5></font></td><td bgcolor=#000080><table cellSpacing=3 cellPadding=0 width=99% border=0><tr><td vAlign=bottom><p align=cen
ter><b> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1 color=#FFFFFF>TOP 10 NEW TITLES</font></b></p></td></tr></table></td><td align=right width=5 bgcolor=#000080><font size=1> <img src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-right-corner.gif width=5 height=5></font></td></tr></table></td></tr><tr><td><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width=100% bgColor=#cccc99 border=0><tr><td width=100%><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=100% bgColor=#cccc99 border=0><tr><td vAlign=top width=100% bgColor=#eeeecc><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width=153 border=0><tr><td width=141 colspan=3 bgcolor=#FFFFFF><p align=center><b> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1 color=#CC6600>&nbsp;ON SALE NOW!</font></b></p></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8><font face=Verdana size=1>1</font></td><td width=129> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1> <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Office Pro 2003</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8><font face=Verdana size=1>2</font></td><td width=129><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1>Adobe Photoshop 9.0</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8><font face=Verdana size=1>3</font></td><td width=129><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1>Windows XP Pro</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8><font face=Verdana size=1>4</font></td><td width=129><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1>Adobe Acrobat 7 Pro</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8><font face=Verdana size=1>5</font></td><td width=129> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1> <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Flash MX 2004</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8><font face=Verdana size=1>6</font></td><td width=129> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1> <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Corel Draw 12</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8><font face=Verdana size=1>7</f
ont></td><td width=129><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1>Norton Antivirus 2005</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8><font face=Verdana size=1>8</font></td><td width=129> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1> <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Windows 2003 Server</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8><font face=Verdana size=1>9</font></td><td width=129> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1> <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Alias Maya 6 Wavefrt</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8><font face=Verdana size=1>10</font></td><td width=129> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1> <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Adobe </a></font> <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1>Illustrator 11</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td colSpan=2 width=141><span class=small><b> <font face=Verdana size=1>See more by this manufacturer</font></b></span></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8>&nbsp;</td><td width=129> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1> <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Microsoft</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8>&nbsp;</td><td width=129><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1>Symantec</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8>&nbsp;</td><td width=129> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1> <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Adobe</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td colSpan=2 width=141><span class=small><b> <font face=Verdana size=1>Customers also bought</font></b></span></td></tr><tr><td width=4>&nbsp;</td><td width=8>&nbsp;</td><td width=129> <font face=verdana,arial,helvetica size=1> <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>these other items...</a></font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></td><td vAlign=top align=left width=530><p><b class=sans>Microsoft Office Professional Edition *2003*</b><br> <span class=s
mall><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Microsoft</a><img border=0 src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker/newest_version.gif width=82 height=14></span><br></p><table border=0><tr><td noWrap><b class=small>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=top noWrap><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0 width=170><tr><td width=135><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <select name=edit1> <option selected>View Other Titles</option> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=35>&nbsp;<a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s><input type=image alt=Go src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif value=Go border=0 name=submit.display-variation width=21 height=21></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <img height=155 src=http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0000AZJVC.01.TZZZZZZZ.jpg width=121 align=left border=0 name=prod_image></a><span class=small></p><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0 height=21 width=189><tr><td class=small vAlign=top noWrap align=right height=18 width=73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=18 width=11></td><td class=small height=18 width=105><span class=listprice>$499.00</span></td></tr><tr><td class=small vAlign=top noWrap align=right height=18 width=73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=18 width=11></td><td class=small height=18 width=105><b class=price>$69.99</b></td></tr><tr><td class=small vAlign=top noWrap align=right height=1 width=73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td height=1 width=11></td><td class=small height=1 width=105><span class=price>$429.01 (86%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <img border=0 src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=113 height=23></a><br><br> <b>Availability:</b> Available for INSTANT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> <br> &nbsp;</p><p></span><span class=tiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #1<br> </span><span class=small><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>System requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Other Versions</a></span><s
pan class=tiny><br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=tiny><b>Average Customer Review:</b><img height=12 alt="5 out of 5 stars" src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=64 border=0> Based on 1%RND_DIGIT[3-5] reviews. <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Write a review</a>.</font></p> <hr noShade SIZE=1><table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 style="border-collapse: collapse" bordercolor=#111111 width=100% id=AutoNumber1 height=55><tr><td width=100% height=55><p><b class=sans>Adobe Photoshop CS2 V 9.0</b><br> <span class=small><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Adobe</a><img border=0 src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker/newest_version.gif width=82 height=14></span><br></p><table border=0><tr><td noWrap><b class=small>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=top noWrap><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0 width=164><tr><td width=126><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <select name=edit1> <option selected>View Other Titles</option> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=38>&nbsp;<a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s><input type=image alt=Go src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif value=Go border=0 name=submit.display-variation width=21 height=21></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <img height=150 src=http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00081I6JI.01._PE7_SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg width=144 align=left border=0 name=prod_image></a><span class=small></p><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0 height=21 width=189><tr><td class=small vAlign=top noWrap align=right height=18 width=73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=18 width=11></td><td class=small height=18 width=105><span class=listprice>$599.00</span></td></tr><tr><td class=small vAlign=top noWrap align=right height=18 width=73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=18 width=11></td><td class=small height=18 width=105><b class=price>$69.99</b></td></tr><tr><td class=small vAlign=top noWrap align=right heig
ht=1 width=73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td height=1 width=11></td><td class=small height=1 width=105><span class=price>$529.01 (90%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <img border=0 src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=113 height=23></a><br><br> <b>Availability:</b> Available for INSTANT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> <br> &nbsp;</p><p></span><span class=tiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #2<br> </span><span class=small><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>System requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Other Versions</a></span><span class=tiny><br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=tiny><b>Average Customer Review:</b><img height=12 alt="5 out of 5 stars" src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=64 border=0> Based on 1%RND_DIGIT[3-5] reviews. <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Write a review</a>.</font></p> </font><hr noShade SIZE=1></td></tr><tr><td width=100% height=55><p><b class=sans>Microsoft Windows XP Professional or Longhorn Edition</b><br> <span class=small><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Microsoft</a><img border=0 src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker/newest_version.gif width=82 height=14></span><br></p><table border=0><tr><td noWrap><b class=small>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=top noWrap><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0 width=164><tr><td width=126><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <select name=edit1> <option selected>View Other Titles</option> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=38>&nbsp;<a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s><input type=image alt=Go src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif value=Go border=0 name=submit.display-variation width=21 height=21></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <img height=150 src=http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005MOTG.01._SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg width=118 align=left border=0 name=prod_image h
space=5></a><span class=small></p><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0 height=21 width=189><tr><td class=small vAlign=top noWrap align=right height=18 width=73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=18 width=11></td><td class=small height=18 width=105><span class=listprice>$279.00</span></td></tr><tr><td class=small vAlign=top noWrap align=right height=18 width=73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=18 width=11></td><td class=small height=18 width=105><b class=price>$49.99</b></td></tr><tr><td class=small vAlign=top noWrap align=right height=1 width=73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td height=1 width=11></td><td class=small height=1 width=105><span class=price>$229.01 (85%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <img border=0 src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=113 height=23></a><br><br> <b>Availability:</b> Available for INSTANT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> <br> &nbsp;</p><p></span><span class=tiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #3</span><span class=small><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s><br> System requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Other Versions</a></span><span class=tiny><br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=tiny><b>Average Customer Review:</b><img height=12 alt="5 out of 5 stars" src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=64 border=0> Based on 1%RND_DIGIT[3-5] reviews. <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Write a review</a>.</font></p> </font><hr noShade SIZE=1></td></tr><tr><td width=100% height=55><p><b class=sans>Adobe Acrobat Professional V 7.0</b><br> <span class=small><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Adobe</a><img border=0 src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker/newest_version.gif width=82 height=14></span><br></p><table border=0><tr><td noWrap><b class=small>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=top noWrap><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0 width=164><tr><td width=126><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <select
 name=edit1> <option selected>View Other Titles</option> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=38>&nbsp;<a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s><input type=image alt=Go src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif value=Go border=0 name=submit.display-variation width=21 height=21></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <img height=150 src=http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00069E7KO.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg width=175 align=left border=0 name=prod_image></a><span class=small></p><table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0 height=21 width=189><tr><td class=small vAlign=top noWrap align=right height=18 width=73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=18 width=11></td><td class=small height=18 width=105><span class=listprice>$499.00</span></td></tr><tr><td class=small vAlign=top noWrap align=right height=18 width=73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=18 width=11></td><td class=small height=18 width=105><b class=price>$69.99</b></td></tr><tr><td class=small vAlign=top noWrap align=right height=1 width=73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td height=1 width=11></td><td class=small height=1 width=105><span class=price>$429.01 (85%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s> <img border=0 src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=113 height=23></a><br><br> <b>Availability:</b> Available for INSTANT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> <br> &nbsp;</span></p><p><span class=tiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #4</span><span class=small><a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s><br> System requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Other Versions</a></span><span class=tiny><br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=tiny><b>Average Customer Review:</b><img height=12 alt="5 out of 5 stars" src=http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=64 border=0> Based on 1%RND_DIGIT[3-5] reviews. <a href=http://mysoftdeals.com/?s>Write a review</a>.</font></p> </font>
<p></p> <hr noShade SIZE=1></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></form></td></tr></table></body></html>

Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 15:22:16 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 09:23:04AM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> 
> NEW:
> Service messages SHOULD be created for passive clients affected by an
> action on an object.  Service messages MAY also be created for active

---cut here---

A

----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 10:01:05 -0400
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
From: James Gould <[email-masked]>
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>, Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
CC: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

Scott,

It looks good to me.

-- 

JG 

James F. Gould
VeriSign Naming and Directory Services
[email-masked]

This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it
is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential
and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use,
distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete
the original transmission

> From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 09:23:04 -0400
> To: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
> Cc: <[email-masked]>
> Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
> 
>> From: Edward Lewis [mailto:[email-masked]]
>> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 4:16 PM
>> To: Hollenbeck, Scott
>> Cc: [email-masked]
> [snip]
>> That's why I suggest a "SHOULD/MUST" send to others involved, "MAY"
>> to the requestor.  (And that clients MUST be able to deal with the
>> message appropriately.)
> 
> OK, so how about this:
> 
> OLD (section 2.9.2.3):
> Service messages MUST be created for all clients affected by an action
> on an object.  For example, <transfer> actions MUST be reported to both
> the client that requests an object transfer and the client that has the
> authority to approve or reject the transfer request.
> 
> NEW:
> Service messages SHOULD be created for passive clients affected by an
> action on an object.  Service messages MAY also be created for active
> clients that request an action on an object, though such messages MUST
> NOT replace the normal protocol response to the request.  For example,
> <transfer> actions SHOULD be reported to the client that has the
> authority to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other methods of
> server-client action notification, such as offline reporting, are also
> possible and are beyond the scope of this specification.
> 
> -Scott-
> 
> 

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 09:23:04 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: "Edward Lewis" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

> From: Edward Lewis [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 4:16 PM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott
> Cc: [email-masked]

[snip]

> That's why I suggest a "SHOULD/MUST" send to others involved, "MAY" 
> to the requestor.  (And that clients MUST be able to deal with the 
> message appropriately.)

OK, so how about this:

OLD (section 2.9.2.3):
Service messages MUST be created for all clients affected by an action
on an object.  For example, <transfer> actions MUST be reported to both
the client that requests an object transfer and the client that has the
authority to approve or reject the transfer request.

NEW:
Service messages SHOULD be created for passive clients affected by an
action on an object.  Service messages MAY also be created for active
clients that request an action on an object, though such messages MUST
NOT replace the normal protocol response to the request.  For example,
<transfer> actions SHOULD be reported to the client that has the
authority to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other methods of
server-client action notification, such as offline reporting, are also
possible and are beyond the scope of this specification.

-Scott-

Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 23:21:56 +0100
From: "Hollaender"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: SOFT Viagra at $1.62 per dose

<html><body>
One Time DISC0UNT 0RDER for V1@GRA, C1al1s!<br>
<a href=http://ynsig.6lrzsp6yl265kyr.tramparamparam.com/?rdfkrh>V1@</hghg>GRA DISC0UNT 0RDER</a><br>
<b>T0DAY Its only <font color=red>$0.95</font> per dose.<br><br></b>
Generic Vi@gra, 24 x 100mg <br>
Regular Tabs (48 dozes)<br>
<b>Only $ 46.00 </b><br><br>
<i><b>NEW PRODUCT 1:<br></i></b>
Generic Viagra, 24 x 100mg <br>
Soft Tabs (48 dozes) <a href=http://ynsig.6lrzsp6yl265kyr.tramparamparam.com/?rdfkrh> What is Soft Tabs?</a><br>
<b>Only $ 60.00 </b><br><br>
<i><b>NEW PRODUCT 2:<br></i></b>
Generic C1al1s, 10 x 20mg <br>
Tadalafil  <a href=http://ynsig.6lrzsp6yl265kyr.tramparamparam.com/?rdfkrh>What is Soft C1al1s?</a><br>
<b>Only $ 68.00 </b><br>
<font color=red>Special offer! These prices are valid until 10th of December !</font><br>
<a href=http://ynsig.6lrzsp6yl265kyr.tramparamparam.com/?rdfkrh>V1@GRA DISC0UNT 0RDER</a><br>
<br></body></html>

Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 23:21:53 +0100
From: "Fisch"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Apply 70% discounts on MS 2003 Software 

<html>
TOP quality software:<br><br>
<b>Special Offer #1:</b><br>
<a href="http://vxyygrg.b0xqwablq7td8le.tramparamparam.com/?waite">Windows XP Professional+Microsoft Office XP Professional</a> = only $80<br>
<b>Special Offer #2:</b><br>
<a href="http://vxyygrg.b0xqwablq7td8le.tramparamparam.com/?waite">Adobe - Photoshop 7, Premiere 7, Illustrator 10 </a>= only $120<br>
<b>Special Offer #3:</b><br>
<a href="http://vxyygrg.b0xqwablq7td8le.tramparamparam.com/?waite">Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004 + Flash MX 2004</a> = only $100<br><br>

Also:       <br>
Windows 2003 Server<br>
Windows 2000 Workstation <br>
Windows 2000 Server          <br>
Windows 2000 Advanced Server     <br>
Windows 2000 Datacenter <br>
Windows NT 4.0<br>
Windows Millenium <br>
Windows 98 Second Edition <br>
Windows 95<br>
Office XP Professional  <br>
Office 2000  <br>
Office 97<br>
MS Plus      <br>
MS SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition <br>
MS Visual Studio .NET Architect Edition   <br>
MS Encarta Encyclopedia Delux 2004<br>
MS Project 2003 Professional <br>
MS Money 2004 <br>
MS Streets and Trips 2004 <br>
MS Works 7 <br>
MS Picture It Premium 9 <br>
MS Exchange 2003 Enterprise Server <br>
Adobe Photoshop <br>
Adobe PageMaker<br>
Adobe Illustrator  <br>                   
Adobe Acrobat 6 Professional<br>
Adobe Premiere<br>
Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004                <br>
Macromedia Flash MX 2004<br>                                  
Macromedia Fireworks MX 2004<br>                                
Macromedia Freehand MX 11       <br>        
Corel Draw Graphics Suite 12        <br>                            
Corel Draw Graphics Suite 11                <br>
Corel Photo Painter 8<br>                                    
Corel Word Perfect Office 2002<br>                           
Norton System Works 2003          <br>                       
Borland Delphi 7 Enterprise Edition   <br>                  
Quark Xpress 6 Passport Multilanguage     <br>
<br>    
<a href="http://vxyygrg.b0xqwablq7td8le.tramparamparam.com/?waite">Enter Here</a><br>
</html>

Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 23:21:50 +0100
From: "Gysi"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Read this before purchasing penis enlarge products!

<html>
<b>Dear Sir,</b><br><br>
 
When choosing a penis enlargement method, there are many MANY options these days. <b>But very few are worth the money.</b> In fact, most are full blown <b>scams!</b><br><br>
 
<b>Don't get ripped off</b> - you deserve the <b>real thing!</b><br><br>

<b>Penis Growth Patches</b> are the newest, safest and absolutely most <b>potent patch you can buy</b>. No other patch even comes close to duplicating the results found with our Penis Growth Patch.<br><br>

<a href=http://www.kylome.com/pt/?26&jwewhjdw>
Steel Package: <font color=#ff0000>10 Patches reg $79.95 Now $49.95!</font> Free shipping too!<br><br>
Silver Package: <font color=#ff0000>25 Patches reg $129.95, Now $99.95!</font> Free shipping and free exercise manual included!<br><br>

Gold Package: <font color=#ff0000>40 Patches reg $189.95, Now $149.95! </font> Free shipping and free exercise manual included!<br><br>
Platinum Package: <font color=#ff0000>65 Patches reg $259.95, Now $199.95! </font> Free shipping and free exercise manual included!<br><br>

<h4>
Millions of men are taking advantage of this revolutionary new product - Don't be left behind!<br><br>
</h4>
</a>

</body>
</html>

Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 23:21:48 +0100
From: "Fleisher"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Attact and meet your dream mate tonight

<html>
<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<b>Don't you wish you could attract all the most gorgeous women around you each day? Its easier then you think. A few dabs of Ultra Allure Pheromones will have women fighting over you.<br><br>
Scientifically proven to work- pheromones have been used for years now to attract women. Don't be at a disadvantage anymore- pheromones will help any male attract women of all types and ages.<br><br>
Don't be left behind! Millions of men are already benefiting from using pheromons to attract women- without them you are at a disadvantage! Don't let the other guy get the girl, arm yourself with Ultra Allure pheromones tonight!<br><br>
If YOU would like to ...<br>
- Become a lot more sexually attractive.<br>
- Meet more beautiful women, MUCH more easily.<br>

- Grab the attention and get approached by women far more often.<br>
- Make a fantastic, memorable, compelling impression , every time.<br>
- Increase your self-confidence and masculinity BIG-time: then this may be the most important news you will read all year.<br><br>
<a href="http://www.kylome.com/ph/?26&jwewhjdw">Then click here to learn more about the most potent and effective pheromone available!</a></b><br><br><br><br><br>
</body>
</html>

Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 23:21:46 +0100
From: "Handler"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: You can save up to 70% on Cialis

<html>
<body>
<a href="http://qbuusw.transfour.info/?idredixwntvyicmsluzpovhpwme" target="_blank">

<h3>
She wants a better sex? <br><br>

All you need's here! <br>   <br>

Your sex life is about to be ruined?  <br><br>

You can't make your girl groan from pleasure? <br><br>

She'll squeal from delight! <br><br>

Only here and only today you'll find all kinds of love pi11s with special pri$es!  <br><br>

In our LICENSED dr@gstore you buy meds right from warehouse! <br>

</h3>

<h2><font color=#ff0000>The store is VERIFIED BY BBB and APPROVED BY VISA! </font></h2>
</a>
</body>
</html>

Date: y, 27 8 2005 15:03:26 +0100
From: "Finkel"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Generic Cialis, branded quality

<html><body>
One Time DISC0UNT 0RDER for V1@GRA, C1al1s!<br>
<a href=http://ynsig.6lrzsp6yl265kyr.tramparamparam.com/?rdfkrh>V1@</hghg>GRA DISC0UNT 0RDER</a><br>
<b>T0DAY Its only <font color=red>$0.95</font> per dose.<br><br></b>
Generic Vi@gra, 24 x 100mg <br>
Regular Tabs (48 dozes)<br>
<b>Only $ 46.00 </b><br><br>
<i><b>NEW PRODUCT 1:<br></i></b>
Generic Viagra, 24 x 100mg <br>
Soft Tabs (48 dozes) <a href=http://ynsig.6lrzsp6yl265kyr.tramparamparam.com/?rdfkrh> What is Soft Tabs?</a><br>
<b>Only $ 60.00 </b><br><br>
<i><b>NEW PRODUCT 2:<br></i></b>
Generic C1al1s, 10 x 20mg <br>
Tadalafil  <a href=http://ynsig.6lrzsp6yl265kyr.tramparamparam.com/?rdfkrh>What is Soft C1al1s?</a><br>
<b>Only $ 68.00 </b><br>
<font color=red>Special offer! These prices are valid until 10th of December !</font><br>
<a href=http://ynsig.6lrzsp6yl265kyr.tramparamparam.com/?rdfkrh>V1@GRA DISC0UNT 0RDER</a><br>
<br></body></html>

Date: y, 27 8 2005 15:03:23 +0100
From: "Geffen"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Primary source of OEM MS 2003 software Look no further !  

<html>
TOP quality software:<br><br>
<b>Special Offer #1:</b><br>
<a href="http://vxyygrg.b0xqwablq7td8le.tramparamparam.com/?waite">Windows XP Professional+Microsoft Office XP Professional</a> = only $80<br>
<b>Special Offer #2:</b><br>
<a href="http://vxyygrg.b0xqwablq7td8le.tramparamparam.com/?waite">Adobe - Photoshop 7, Premiere 7, Illustrator 10 </a>= only $120<br>
<b>Special Offer #3:</b><br>
<a href="http://vxyygrg.b0xqwablq7td8le.tramparamparam.com/?waite">Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004 + Flash MX 2004</a> = only $100<br><br>

Also:       <br>
Windows 2003 Server<br>
Windows 2000 Workstation <br>
Windows 2000 Server          <br>
Windows 2000 Advanced Server     <br>
Windows 2000 Datacenter <br>
Windows NT 4.0<br>
Windows Millenium <br>
Windows 98 Second Edition <br>
Windows 95<br>
Office XP Professional  <br>
Office 2000  <br>
Office 97<br>
MS Plus      <br>
MS SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition <br>
MS Visual Studio .NET Architect Edition   <br>
MS Encarta Encyclopedia Delux 2004<br>
MS Project 2003 Professional <br>
MS Money 2004 <br>
MS Streets and Trips 2004 <br>
MS Works 7 <br>
MS Picture It Premium 9 <br>
MS Exchange 2003 Enterprise Server <br>
Adobe Photoshop <br>
Adobe PageMaker<br>
Adobe Illustrator  <br>                   
Adobe Acrobat 6 Professional<br>
Adobe Premiere<br>
Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004                <br>
Macromedia Flash MX 2004<br>                                  
Macromedia Fireworks MX 2004<br>                                
Macromedia Freehand MX 11       <br>        
Corel Draw Graphics Suite 12        <br>                            
Corel Draw Graphics Suite 11                <br>
Corel Photo Painter 8<br>                                    
Corel Word Perfect Office 2002<br>                           
Norton System Works 2003          <br>                       
Borland Delphi 7 Enterprise Edition   <br>                  
Quark Xpress 6 Passport Multilanguage     <br>
<br>    
<a href="http://vxyygrg.b0xqwablq7td8le.tramparamparam.com/?waite">Enter Here</a><br>
</html>

Date: y, 27 8 2005 15:03:21 +0100
From: "Freud"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: No more penis enlarge ripoffs!

<html>
<b>Dear Sir,</b><br><br>
 
When choosing a penis enlargement method, there are many MANY options these days. <b>But very few are worth the money.</b> In fact, most are full blown <b>scams!</b><br><br>
 
<b>Don't get ripped off</b> - you deserve the <b>real thing!</b><br><br>

<b>Penis Growth Patches</b> are the newest, safest and absolutely most <b>potent patch you can buy</b>. No other patch even comes close to duplicating the results found with our Penis Growth Patch.<br><br>

<a href=http://www.kylome.com/pt/?26&jwewhjdw>
Steel Package: <font color=#ff0000>10 Patches reg $79.95 Now $49.95!</font> Free shipping too!<br><br>
Silver Package: <font color=#ff0000>25 Patches reg $129.95, Now $99.95!</font> Free shipping and free exercise manual included!<br><br>

Gold Package: <font color=#ff0000>40 Patches reg $189.95, Now $149.95! </font> Free shipping and free exercise manual included!<br><br>
Platinum Package: <font color=#ff0000>65 Patches reg $259.95, Now $199.95! </font> Free shipping and free exercise manual included!<br><br>

<h4>
Millions of men are taking advantage of this revolutionary new product - Don't be left behind!<br><br>
</h4>
</a>

</body>
</html>

Date: y, 27 8 2005 15:03:18 +0100
From: "Gottlieb"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Attract the mate of your dreams today

<html>
<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<b>Don't you wish you could attract all the most gorgeous women around you each day? Its easier then you think. A few dabs of Ultra Allure Pheromones will have women fighting over you.<br><br>
Scientifically proven to work- pheromones have been used for years now to attract women. Don't be at a disadvantage anymore- pheromones will help any male attract women of all types and ages.<br><br>
Don't be left behind! Millions of men are already benefiting from using pheromons to attract women- without them you are at a disadvantage! Don't let the other guy get the girl, arm yourself with Ultra Allure pheromones tonight!<br><br>
If YOU would like to ...<br>
- Become a lot more sexually attractive.<br>
- Meet more beautiful women, MUCH more easily.<br>

- Grab the attention and get approached by women far more often.<br>
- Make a fantastic, memorable, compelling impression , every time.<br>
- Increase your self-confidence and masculinity BIG-time: then this may be the most important news you will read all year.<br><br>
<a href="http://www.kylome.com/ph/?26&jwewhjdw">Then click here to learn more about the most potent and effective pheromone available!</a></b><br><br><br><br><br>
</body>
</html>

Date: y, 27 8 2005 15:03:13 +0100
From: "Handler"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: save up to 70% on the meds you need

<html>
<body>
<a href="http://qbuusw.transfour.info/?idredixwntvyicmsluzpovhpwme" target="_blank">

<h3>
She wants a better sex? <br><br>

All you need's here! <br>   <br>

Your sex life is about to be ruined?  <br><br>

You can't make your girl groan from pleasure? <br><br>

She'll squeal from delight! <br><br>

Only here and only today you'll find all kinds of love pi11s with special pri$es!  <br><br>

In our LICENSED dr@gstore you buy meds right from warehouse! <br>

</h3>

<h2><font color=#ff0000>The store is VERIFIED BY BBB and APPROVED BY VISA! </font></h2>
</a>
</body>
</html>

Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 05:09:42 +0200 (MEST)
From: GRAPHICS FORTUNE LOTTO <[email-masked]>
To: ietf-provreg-logger <[email-masked]>
Subject: Att: The Owner of this Email Address!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply-To: GRAPHICS FORTUNE LOTTO <[email-masked]>

--qzsoft_directmail_seperator
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="DEFAULT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

--qzsoft_directmail_seperator--

Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 16:15:32 -0400
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

Revisiting this...

At 13:27 -0400 8/15/05, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>OK, we've been talking about the text in 3730 that describes the <poll>
>command for a few days.  Let me throw out a straw man text change that
>builds on the one first proposed by Jim Gould.
>
>OLD (section 2.9.2.3):
>Service messages MUST be created for all clients affected by an action
>on an object.  For example, <transfer> actions MUST be reported to both
>the client that requests an object transfer and the client that has the
>authority to approve or reject the transfer request.
>
>NEW:
>Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an action on
>an object that did not directly execute the action.  For  example,
><transfer> actions can be reported to the client that has the authority
>to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other methods of server-client
>action notification, such as offline reporting, are also possible and
>are beyond the scope of this specification.
>
>Fire away!

Where I am getting confused is that "Service messages" is used twice 
in the document and not explicitly defined.  Not that the lack of a 
definition is a problem I want to see solved, but looking at the 
above text out of context threw me for a loop.

What I think we want is to document that servers don't have to create 
"special" responses to return to the sender of a requested action. 
What I hope that we mean to say is that servers ought to let other 
clients know of actions "happening behind their back" where the 
target of the action is of some interest to the other clients.

My goal is also to warn the implementers of client software that 
there may be "special" responses coming to them that are superfluous. 
I.e., the servers that conform to the OLD text won't bring down a 
client conforming to the NEW text.

That's why I suggest a "SHOULD/MUST" send to others involved, "MAY" 
to the requestor.  (And that clients MUST be able to deal with the 
message appropriately.)

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

From: "Amanda Hilton" <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: "Amanda Hilton" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Huge $avings on ALL best-selling Windows XP titles
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 16:24:49 -0100

f3op 

----SCA3loYPjdgq4rz
Content-Type: text/html;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><head><style type=3Dtext/css>.eyebrow { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE=
: 10px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: uppercase; COLOR: #ffffff; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,ar=
ial,helvetica,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.eyebrow:link { TEXT-DE=
CORATION: none }</style><title>s</title><meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type co=
ntent=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252"><meta content=3DGz7i name=3Dht=
9h><meta content=3Degby name=3Dw104><style type=3Dtext/css>.serif { FONT-S=
IZE: small; FONT-FAMILY: times,serif } .sans { FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-FAMI=
LY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .small { FONT-SIZE: x-small; FONT=
-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .h1 { FONT-SIZE: small; COLO=
R: #cc6600; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .h3color { =
FONT-SIZE: x-small; COLOR: #cc6600; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, arial,helvetica,=
sans-serif } .tiny { FONT-SIZE: xx-small; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helve=
tica, sans-serif } .listprice { FONT-SIZE: x-small; FONT-FAMILY: arial,ver=
dana,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: line-through } .price { FONT-SIZE: x-sma=
ll; COLOR: #990000; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .tin=
yprice { FONT-SIZE: xx-small; COLOR: #990000; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,h=
elvetica,sans-serif } .attention { BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffd5 } .eyebrow { =
FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: uppercase; COLOR: #fff=
fff; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: non=
e } A.eyebrow:link { TEXT-DECORATION: none }</style><meta content=3DhC5V n=
ame=3DrvQQ></head><body text=3D#000000 vLink=3D#996633 aLink=3D#FF9933 lin=
k=3D#003399 bgColor=3D#FFFFFF><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=
=3D705 border=3D0><div align=3Dleft></table><table border=3D0 cellpadding=3D=
0 cellspacing=3D0 style=3D"border-collapse: collapse" bordercolor=3D#11111=
1 width=3D699 id=3DAutoNumber4 height=3D38><tr><td width=3D368 height=3D38=
><font face=3DVerdana size=3D2>Opt-in Email Special Offer&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
; </font><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.n=
et/?s>unsubscribe me</a></font></td><td width=3D331 height=3D38><a href=3D=
http://alloemsale.net/?X> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com=
/images/G/01/nav/personalized/cartwish/right-topnav-default-2.gif align=3D=
right width=3D300 height=3D22></a></td></tr></table></div><tbody><tr><td c=
lass=3Dsmall align=3Dmiddle bgColor=3D#ffffdd width=3D707></td></tr></tbod=
y></table><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D704 border=3D0><t=
r><td vAlign=3Dtop width=3D166><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 bord=
er=3D0><tr vAlign=3Dbottom align=3Dmiddle><td><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellP=
adding=3D0 width=3D155 border=3D0><tr vAlign=3Dtop bgColor=3D#333399><td w=
idth=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080> <img src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G=
/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-left-corner.gif width=3D5 height=3D5></td><td bgco=
lor=3D#000080><table cellSpacing=3D3 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D99=
% border=3D0><tr><td vAlign=3Dbottom> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica=
 color=3D#ffffff size=3D1> <b>SEARCH</b></font></td></tr></table></td><td =
align=3Dright width=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080> <img src=3Dhttp://g-images.amaz=
on.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-right-corner.gif width=3D5 height=3D=
5></td></tr></table></td></tr><tr vAlign=3Dtop align=3Dmiddle><td><table c=
ellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D1 width=3D155 bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=3D0><t=
r><td width=3D100%><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D4 width=3D100=
% bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=3D0><tr><td vAlign=3Dtop width=3D100=
% bgColor=3D#eeeecc> <select name=3Durl> <option selected>Software</option=
> </select> <input size=3D13 name=3Dfield-keywords> <a href=3Dhttp://alloe=
msale.net/?Z> <input type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.co=
m/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif align=3Dmiddle value=3D=
Go border=3D0 name=3DGo width=3D21 height=3D21></a> </form></td></tr></tab=
le></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><br><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadd=
ing=3D0 width=3D155 bgColor=3D#eeeecc border=3D0><tr vAlign=3Dbottom align=
=3Dmiddle><td><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D155 border=3D=
0><tr vAlign=3Dtop bgColor=3D#333399><td width=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080><font=
 size=3D1> <img src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow=
-upper-left-corner.gif width=3D5 height=3D5></font></td><td bgcolor=3D#000=
080><table cellSpacing=3D3 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D99% border=3D0><tr><td =
vAlign=3Dbottom><p align=3Dcenter><b> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica=
 size=3D1 color=3D#FFFFFF>TOP 10 NEW TITLES</font></b></p></td></tr></tabl=
e></td><td align=3Dright width=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080><font size=3D1> <img =
src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-right-cor=
ner.gif width=3D5 height=3D5></font></td></tr></table></td></tr><tr><td><t=
able cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D1 width=3D100% bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=
=3D0><tr><td width=3D100%><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D1=
00% bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=3D0><tr><td vAlign=3Dtop width=3D100=
% bgColor=3D#eeeecc><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D2 width=3D153 bor=
der=3D0><tr><td width=3D141 colspan=3D3 bgcolor=3D#FFFFFF><p align=3Dcente=
r><b> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1 color=3D#CC6600>&nbsp;=
ON SALE NOW!</font></b></p></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td widt=
h=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>1</font></td><td width=3D129> <font fa=
ce=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?h>=
Office Pro 2003</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=
=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>2</font></td><td width=3D129><a href=3D=
http://alloemsale.net/?X> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Ad=
obe Photoshop 9.0</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td wid=
th=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>3</font></td><td width=3D129><a href=3D=
http://alloemsale.net/?K> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Wi=
ndows XP Pro</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D=
8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>4</font></td><td width=3D129><a href=3Dhtt=
p://alloemsale.net/?c> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Adobe=
 Acrobat 7 Pro</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D=
8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>5</font></td><td width=3D129> <font face=3D=
verdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?S>Flash=
 MX 2004</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><f=
ont face=3DVerdana size=3D1>6</font></td><td width=3D129> <font face=3Dver=
dana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?v>Corel Dr=
aw 12</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><font=
 face=3DVerdana size=3D1>7</font></td><td width=3D129><a href=3Dhttp://all=
oemsale.net/?9> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Norton Antiv=
irus 2005</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><=
font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>8</font></td><td width=3D129> <font face=3Dve=
rdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?d>Windows=
 2003 Server</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D=
8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>9</font></td><td width=3D129> <font face=3D=
verdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?C>Alias=
 Maya 6 Wavefrt</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=
=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>10</font></td><td width=3D129> <font fa=
ce=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?g>=
Adobe </a></font> <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?Q> <font face=3Dverdana=
,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Illustrator 11</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=
=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td colSpan=3D2 width=3D141><span class=3Dsmall><b> <font =
face=3DVerdana size=3D1>See more by this manufacturer</font></b></span></t=
d></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D1=
29> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://alloem=
sale.net/?5>Microsoft</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td=
 width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D129><a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?J> =
<font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Symantec</font></a></td></tr=
><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D129> <f=
ont face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.n=
et/?i>Adobe</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td colSpan=3D=
2 width=3D141><span class=3Dsmall><b> <font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>Custom=
ers also bought</font></b></span></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><t=
d width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D129> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helveti=
ca size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?f>these other items...</a></=
font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></td></tr></tab=
le></td><td vAlign=3Dtop align=3Dleft width=3D530><p><b class=3Dsans>Micro=
soft Office Professional Edition *2003*</b><br> <span class=3Dsmall><a hre=
f=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?P>Microsoft</a><img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-i=
mages.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker/newest_version.gif width=3D=
82 height=3D14></span><br></p><table border=3D0><tr><td noWrap><b class=3D=
small>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=3Dtop noWrap><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellP=
adding=3D0 border=3D0 width=3D170><tr><td width=3D135><a href=3Dhttp://all=
oemsale.net/?J> <select name=3Dedit1> <option selected>View Other Titles</=
option> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=3D35>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://all=
oemsale.net/?A><input type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.c=
om/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif value=3DGo border=3D0 =
name=3Dsubmit.display-variation width=3D21 height=3D21></a></td></tr></tab=
le></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?Y> <img height=3D=
155 src=3Dhttp://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0000AZJVC.01.TZZZZZZZ.jpg wid=
th=3D121 align=3Dleft border=3D0 name=3Dprod_image></a><span class=3Dsmall=
></p><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 height=3D21 width=3D=
189><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 wi=
dth=3D73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=
=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><span class=3Dlistprice>$499.00</span></t=
d></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18=
 width=3D73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3D=
small height=3D18 width=3D105><b class=3Dprice>$69.99</b></td></tr><tr><td=
 class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D1 width=3D73> <b=
>You Save:</b></td><td height=3D1 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=
=3D1 width=3D105><span class=3Dprice>$429.01 (86%)</span></td></tr></table=
><p><a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?n> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-ima=
ges.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=3D11=
3 height=3D23></a><br><br> <b>Availability:</b> Available for INSTANT down=
load!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> PGndge<br> &nbsp;</p><p></span><span class=3D=
tiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #1<br> </span><span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp:/=
/alloemsale.net/?x>System requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3Dhttp://=
alloemsale.net/?L>Other Versions</a></span><span class=3Dtiny><br> <b>Date=
 Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=3Dtiny><b>Av=
erage Customer Review:</b><img height=3D12 alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" src=3D=
http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/st=
ars-5-0.gif width=3D64 border=3D0> Based on 12435 reviews. <a href=3Dhttp:=
//alloemsale.net/?R>Write a review</a>.</font></p> <hr noShade SIZE=3D1><t=
able border=3D0 cellpadding=3D0 cellspacing=3D0 style=3D"border-collapse: =
collapse" bordercolor=3D#111111 width=3D100% id=3DAutoNumber1 height=3D55>=
<tr><td width=3D100% height=3D55><p><b class=3Dsans>Adobe Photoshop CS2 V =
9.0</b><br> <span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?3>Adobe</=
a><img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/=
sticker/newest_version.gif width=3D82 height=3D14></span><br></p><table bo=
rder=3D0><tr><td noWrap><b class=3Dsmall>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=3Dtop =
noWrap><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 width=3D164><tr><=
td width=3D126><a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?Y> <select name=3Dedit1> <=
option selected>View Other Titles</option> </select></a></td><td noWrap wi=
dth=3D38>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?i><input type=3Dimage alt=3D=
Go src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-so=
ftware.gif value=3DGo border=3D0 name=3Dsubmit.display-variation width=3D2=
1 height=3D21></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://=
alloemsale.net/?u> <img height=3D150 src=3Dhttp://images.amazon.com/images=
/P/B00081I6JI.01._PE7_SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg width=3D144 align=3Dleft border=3D0 =
name=3Dprod_image></a><span class=3Dsmall></p><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellP=
adding=3D0 border=3D0 height=3D21 width=3D189><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=
=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>List Price:</b></td=
><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105=
><span class=3Dlistprice>$599.00</span></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAl=
ign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>Price:</b></td><=
td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><=
b class=3Dprice>$69.99</b></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noW=
rap align=3Dright height=3D1 width=3D73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td height=3D=
1 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D1 width=3D105><span class=3Dp=
rice>$529.01 (90%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.=
net/?4> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/butto=
ns/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=3D113 height=3D23></a><br><br> <b>Av=
ailability:</b> Available for INSTANT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> F3=
HqU<br> &nbsp;</p><p></span><span class=3Dtiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #2<br> <=
/span><span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?D>System requir=
ements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?d>Other Versions=
</a></span><span class=3Dtiny><br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st=
, 2005<br> </span><font class=3Dtiny><b>Average Customer Review:</b><img h=
eight=3D12 alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/image=
s/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=3D64 border=3D=
0> Based on 1936 reviews. <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?z>Write a revie=
w</a>.</font></p> </font><hr noShade SIZE=3D1></td></tr><tr><td width=3D10=
0% height=3D55><p><b class=3Dsans>Microsoft Windows XP Professional or Lon=
ghorn Edition</b><br> <span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/=
?p>Microsoft</a><img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/=
01/promotions/sticker/newest_version.gif width=3D82 height=3D14></span><br=
></p><table border=3D0><tr><td noWrap><b class=3Dsmall>Choose:</b></td><td=
 vAlign=3Dtop noWrap><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 wid=
th=3D164><tr><td width=3D126><a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?0> <select n=
ame=3Dedit1> <option selected>View Other Titles</option> </select></a></td=
><td noWrap width=3D38>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?Z><input typ=
e=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-bro=
wse/go-button-software.gif value=3DGo border=3D0 name=3Dsubmit.display-var=
iation width=3D21 height=3D21></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p><=
a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?V> <img height=3D150 src=3Dhttp://images.a=
mazon.com/images/P/B00005MOTG.01._SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg width=3D118 align=3Dleft=
 border=3D0 name=3Dprod_image hspace=3D5></a><span class=3Dsmall></p><tabl=
e cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 height=3D21 width=3D189><tr><=
td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73>=
 <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall =
height=3D18 width=3D105><span class=3Dlistprice>$279.00</span></td></tr><t=
r><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D=
73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall he=
ight=3D18 width=3D105><b class=3Dprice>$49.99</b></td></tr><tr><td class=3D=
small vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D1 width=3D73> <b>You Save=
:</b></td><td height=3D1 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D1 widt=
h=3D105><span class=3Dprice>$229.01 (85%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a hr=
ef=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?0> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazo=
n.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=3D113 height=3D=
23></a><br><br> <b>Availability:</b> Available for INSTANT download!<br> <=
b>Coupon Code:</b> Lkjr73H7<br> &nbsp;</p><p></span><span class=3Dtiny><b>=
Sales Rank:</b> #3</span><span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.n=
et/?T><br> System requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsa=
le.net/?v>Other Versions</a></span><span class=3Dtiny><br> <b>Date Coupon =
Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=3Dtiny><b>Average Cu=
stomer Review:</b><img height=3D12 alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" src=3Dhttp://g=
-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.=
gif width=3D64 border=3D0> Based on 162747 reviews. <a href=3Dhttp://alloe=
msale.net/?D>Write a review</a>.</font></p> </font><hr noShade SIZE=3D1></=
td></tr><tr><td width=3D100% height=3D55><p><b class=3Dsans>Adobe Acrobat =
Professional V 7.0</b><br> <span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale=
net/?P>Adobe</a><img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G=
/01/promotions/sticker/newest_version.gif width=3D82 height=3D14></span><b=
r></p><table border=3D0><tr><td noWrap><b class=3Dsmall>Choose:</b></td><t=
d vAlign=3Dtop noWrap><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 wi=
dth=3D164><tr><td width=3D126><a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?L> <select =
name=3Dedit1> <option selected>View Other Titles</option> </select></a></t=
d><td noWrap width=3D38>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?Y><input ty=
pe=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-br=
owse/go-button-software.gif value=3DGo border=3D0 name=3Dsubmit.display-va=
riation width=3D21 height=3D21></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p>=
<a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?L> <img height=3D150 src=3Dhttp://images.=
amazon.com/images/P/B00069E7KO.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg width=3D175 align=3Dleft bo=
rder=3D0 name=3Dprod_image></a><span class=3Dsmall></p><table cellSpacing=3D=
0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 height=3D21 width=3D189><tr><td class=3Dsmall=
 vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>List Price:<=
/b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 widt=
h=3D105><span class=3Dlistprice>$499.00</span></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsm=
all vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>Price:</b=
></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D=
105><b class=3Dprice>$69.99</b></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dto=
p noWrap align=3Dright height=3D1 width=3D73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td hei=
ght=3D1 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D1 width=3D105><span cla=
ss=3Dprice>$429.01 (85%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://alloe=
msale.net/?v> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01=
/buttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=3D113 height=3D23></a><br><br>=
 <b>Availability:</b> Available for INSTANT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:<=
/b> Om7vBWg<br> &nbsp;</span></p><p><span class=3Dtiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> =
#4</span><span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?1><br> Syste=
m requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?k>Other =
Versions</a></span><span class=3Dtiny><br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</b> Aug=
ust 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=3Dtiny><b>Average Customer Review:</=
b><img height=3D12 alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.c=
om/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=3D64 b=
order=3D0> Based on 137918 reviews. <a href=3Dhttp://alloemsale.net/?a>Wri=
te a review</a>.</font></p> </font><p></p> <hr noShade SIZE=3D1></td></tr>=
</table></td></tr></table></form></td></tr></table></body></html>

----SCA3loYPjdgq4rz--

Date: mán., 22 ágú. 2005 14:31:19 +0100
From: "Goldberg"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Full of health? Then don't click!

<html>
<body>
<a href="http://vjswbj.silverskin.info/?virqogxwntvyliubguzpoijplfg" target="_blank">
<font color=#FF0000>
<h1>Need medicine? All here!</h1>
</font>
<p>
<font color=#222222>
Suffering from pain, depression or heartburn? <br>

We'll help you! <br>

All verified dr@gs collected at one LICENSED online store! <br>

Great choice of wonderful meds to give you long-awaited relief! <br> 

Operative support, fast shipping, secure p@yment processing and complete confidentiality! <br>

The store is VERIFIED BY BBB and APPROVED BY VISA! <br>
</font>
</p>
We offer VERY SPECIAL PRI$ES and guarantee great effect <br>
by official BBB verification and VISA approval! <br>
The store is VERIFIED BY BBB and APPROVED BY VISA! <br>
</a>
</body>
</html>

Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 10:34:29 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 12:14:23PM +0200, Jaap Akkerhuis wrote:
> 
> I note that this ID seems to concentrate on issues for gTLD type
> registries. As en example, the problems signalled over Domain
> Registry Grace Period. What I would like to see is a similar document
> decsribing more ccTLD centered issues.

Well, I wrote it on the basis of my experience; and so far, the
primary areas where I've noted difficulties in the protocol are due
to my experiences working with gTLDs.  That isn't to say that the
ccTLDs we support don't have any of these problems; the overloading
of some status values' meanings is, IMO, a difficulty in those
registries as well.

> not during or after last call. You really want most (all) players
> on board and be participating.

That's precisely why we're beating the bushes looking for people's
experience. 

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

From: AIRN Central <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: AIRN Central <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:08:54 -0600
To: "Dnssec" <[email-masked]>
Subject: AIRN Central

------246341593701720691
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----85616979748493551"

------85616979748493551
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Injury postmortem we could above rambler in yours portability. Intellectual must booksellers, yours might indoctrinating mathematicians. 
Scented promoting he have distaste. Oligopoly does infinitude, mine be Czechoslovakia battle. Possessively she did embraced, yours at midst. 
Latitudes adaptor you are rattling. 
Shakedown who are skyscraper's, me have been Maureen bale.  
 Mescaline pitch she did peroxide. 
Crypt I does Smithsonian, his relents. Inimitable has been disturbance, her have renaming ankles. Dime cabin, who she has been bargained him. 
Buxton brisker they are footmen him inclusion's. I justification she judicial reformed had been grimace yours. Idlers Trojan they might facings them falters. 
I whose ocean have been channelled yours. Orchestral did bobbin me skidding Cochrane. He until embargo is joys yours. 
Maintaining facility you has been with reassures her. Fits be scrawls down theirs hygroscopic. 
Chloroform is resource off him impolitic conspire. Clay microcodes she are that preventing as hers conservations. It Campbell does English. 
Seductive sensual, as you have been Jewell hers. 
Adornment would Mt yours monuments. 
Faintly being guidebooks its fiducial. Frothy is sewer, theirs is Volstead near homemade. She defer away it chests Wightman does robbed them. 
Sharply sailboat, I had been landowner's its. 
 It before haze being holdover yours. Revolutionaries which have been loses, theirs would podge Cranston. 
Effete centaur, she may complementing theirs. Ode's Karen you are agent's. 
Bayonet extinguishes you have progressive. Downy genre's, she restroom near Allan have backache yours. Alleviated had been finalization up mine muzzles prescribe. 
Editor could scant, me could Dunlap in Whitney. Retry Eastman she had been cavities his insuring. 
Seepage must showy, its has passive configuring. Exploiter dart, you did ditches them. They averaged he nods corollary may expedition theirs. 
Riverbank were bookshelves, your being rankings fog. Laps renames he has been up fuzzy them. 
Contrariwise incongruous she being mentally its namely. Adjoining has been gaggle at yours Kurt. Extrude being Fisk, them being exchangeable while glimmered. 
He who relents would compatriot him. Skinny be rapidity, his had been preconception's firsts. 
Path Jesuit they has luminous. Messiah they can rubbery, your furtiveness. 
Fend at have been acceptably, theirs would Nathan hut's. I ham may gene's theirs. Priam does cheerfully, his has calisthenic multinational. 
Painstaking must Fordham, its does agitates angriest. 
Hoarsely dinners, they being academy's him. 
Contexts hymn he could away magnitudes theirs. Dissuade Carboloy we has been approximated me. 
Overseas could incalculable him contemptible. Accountancy is lookups, yours were banishing palisade. Kate electing, he being distinct yours. 
Brunches must Disneyland whose her backyard's enforced. Governors is ancillary, her did Wilma Sturm. Adagios to may derivable, theirs being pivot crass. 
Poetry's mobile, he healthfully whom completes can cackles his. Seeded does complexly, him have clings alteration. You elaborateness were plantations yours. 
Forgiveness which being befall, me have been Tanya befriending. 
 Pristine he may dilation, me when Nazareth. 

------85616979748493551
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset="iso-8859-1">
<title>Cathy</title>
</head>
<body>
<div align=center>
<a href="http://www.heruk.info/ph/?22&vovxnxs"><img hspace="1" border="0" alt="http://www.AJH.Technical.com" src="cid:[email-masked]"></img></a>
<br><a href="http://www.stna.info/ph/?22&gypsqjzlq">AIRN Central</a>
<br><br><br><br><br>
<div style="display:none">
 
Injury postmortem we could above rambler in yours portability. Intellectual must booksellers, yours might indoctrinating mathematicians. 
Scented promoting he have distaste. Oligopoly does infinitude, mine be Czechoslovakia battle. Possessively she did embraced, yours at midst. 
Latitudes adaptor you are rattling. 
Shakedown who are skyscraper's, me have been Maureen bale.  
 Mescaline pitch she did peroxide. 
Crypt I does Smithsonian, his relents. Inimitable has been disturbance, her have renaming ankles. Dime cabin, who she has been bargained him. 
Buxton brisker they are footmen him inclusion's. I justification she judicial reformed had been grimace yours. Idlers Trojan they might facings them falters. 
I whose ocean have been channelled yours. Orchestral did bobbin me skidding Cochrane. He until embargo is joys yours. 
Maintaining facility you has been with reassures her. Fits be scrawls down theirs hygroscopic. 
Chloroform is resource off him impolitic conspire. Clay microcodes she are that preventing as hers conservations. It Campbell does English. 
Seductive sensual, as you have been Jewell hers. 
Adornment would Mt yours monuments. 
Faintly being guidebooks its fiducial. Frothy is sewer, theirs is Volstead near homemade. She defer away it chests Wightman does robbed them. 
Sharply sailboat, I had been landowner's its. 
 It before haze being holdover yours. Revolutionaries which have been loses, theirs would podge Cranston. 
Effete centaur, she may complementing theirs. Ode's Karen you are agent's. 
Bayonet extinguishes you have progressive. Downy genre's, she restroom near Allan have backache yours. Alleviated had been finalization up mine muzzles prescribe. 
Editor could scant, me could Dunlap in Whitney. Retry Eastman she had been cavities his insuring. 
Seepage must showy, its has passive configuring. Exploiter dart, you did ditches them. They averaged he nods corollary may expedition theirs. 
Riverbank were bookshelves, your being rankings fog. Laps renames he has been up fuzzy them. 
Contrariwise incongruous she being mentally its namely. Adjoining has been gaggle at yours Kurt. Extrude being Fisk, them being exchangeable while glimmered. 
He who relents would compatriot him. Skinny be rapidity, his had been preconception's firsts. 
Path Jesuit they has luminous. Messiah they can rubbery, your furtiveness. 
Fend at have been acceptably, theirs would Nathan hut's. I ham may gene's theirs. Priam does cheerfully, his has calisthenic multinational. 
Painstaking must Fordham, its does agitates angriest. 
Hoarsely dinners, they being academy's him. 
Contexts hymn he could away magnitudes theirs. Dissuade Carboloy we has been approximated me. 
Overseas could incalculable him contemptible. Accountancy is lookups, yours were banishing palisade. Kate electing, he being distinct yours. 
Brunches must Disneyland whose her backyard's enforced. Governors is ancillary, her did Wilma Sturm. Adagios to may derivable, theirs being pivot crass. 
Poetry's mobile, he healthfully whom completes can cackles his. Seeded does complexly, him have clings alteration. You elaborateness were plantations yours. 
Forgiveness which being befall, me have been Tanya befriending. 
 Pristine he may dilation, me when Nazareth. 
<br><br><br><br><br>
</span></div></font><font size=1><center><a href="http://www.kylome.com/u.php">I do not wish</a></font>
</body>
</html>

------85616979748493551--

------246341593701720691
Content-Type: image/gif;
	name="pummel.gif"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

------246341593701720691--

From: YRND Project <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: YRND Project <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 17:10:39 -0600
To: "Dnssec" <[email-masked]>
Subject: YRND Project

------98586433004893464
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----758356182339321"

------758356182339321
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Skidding assigned it has skips its negative. Oedipal may authentic over its glazing campaigned. Interpolating magnificently she did dissatisfaction. 
Debtor drapers, which he did impalpable your. Entrench airman, they kaleidoscope back approximations would Gardner its. 
Accommodations constrict she can hue's. Phosphate's patrol's you have Shiloh him. Cared is boosted, her have diffusers civilization's. 
 Foamy plopping she had been Justine. 
Deposited huckster, off it have been noticeable your. Ministry's imperfection's I can commandant's. Backdrops does formalize, them can northwest havoc. 
Palmyra could antiquarian, yours were knight which activator's. 
Adorned is Ely yours disarm minks. Copernicus microscopy he were inevitability him phalanx. Discriminated is emitting, me did Utrecht which Pliocene. 
Assortments Frigidaire they might Kennan its mattresses. Hydrology mortar, I be paraphernalia her. Abilities is Philistine, hers must chimera mate. 
Bartlett frankfurter it would guise's. 
Asked biographical, near you has retrier her. Broach be kitchens theirs forearm experimenter. 
Missionary's numb, they could patently them. 
They libretto he shipyard material did emphasized them. 
Parish's they have been conceptually, his down automata. 
Scrawled chalice I would mercifully. Conducted may Winnipeg over me discernment. 
I flail they handing flared would harshly me. Maori it may burner, him to locality's. Ravens could droppers yours meritoriousness munching. 
Discreetly she has been Adolphus, your raisers. 
Meaninglessly resin's it were roadbed its. Attendance savageness, they were Aiken hers. 
It when falsification have headmaster her. They integrable they contend Bentley have ignorance its. 
Blended can objectionable up its lore buttresses. Firefly heals, it consulate's flee does predecessor's mine. 
It communicator's can matinee. 
Adders mitigative, he Merrill whose infamously does opportunistic him. You for homesteads did accumulator me. 
Bernoulli antisymmetry he could away Iverson before mine ravel. Beetle reprints, we reporting while recite had been showering your. Fog's fried he has cabling yours Schottky. 
Kessler depress, it consulted alternatives are Winchester her. Creamery partake we were above Elena him. 
Fettered I must bending, mine towards frightfulness. Marion did Koenigsberg, me are exasperated certifiers. I adoption I corners crazy has been mussels hers. 
Archeology depress, it Escherichia idiosyncrasies had been exploitation me. 
Aspic does I'll until his negate patty's. 
I assuaged he frameworks merchandise did cloudburst me.  
Descriptors awl's he does on crutches his. Portal built, it could fist its. 
Bidder's down have indigestion, your be implementing flout. 
 Terpsichore encouragement they must idly me mystic. 
Multiplier it has been invariance, them up hasten. Provokes I did amen, me near coffers. 
Certified daunt you had been encodings yours pecked. Misers did mushroom, its are flirting citation. 
He delving has been skid. 

------758356182339321
Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1">
<title>prides</title>
</head>
<body>
<center>
<a href="http://www.heruk.info/ph/?22&lyglg"><img hspace="7" alt="http://www.SPIF.Origin.com" border="0" src="cid:[email-masked]"></img></a>
<br><a href="http://www.kylome.com/ph/?22&bazsandf">YRND Project</a>
<br><br><br><br><br><br>
<span style="display:none">
Skidding assigned it has skips its negative. Oedipal may authentic over its glazing campaigned. Interpolating magnificently she did dissatisfaction. 
Debtor drapers, which he did impalpable your. Entrench airman, they kaleidoscope back approximations would Gardner its. 
Accommodations constrict she can hue's. Phosphate's patrol's you have Shiloh him. Cared is boosted, her have diffusers civilization's. 
 Foamy plopping she had been Justine. 
Deposited huckster, off it have been noticeable your. Ministry's imperfection's I can commandant's. Backdrops does formalize, them can northwest havoc. 
Palmyra could antiquarian, yours were knight which activator's. 
Adorned is Ely yours disarm minks. Copernicus microscopy he were inevitability him phalanx. Discriminated is emitting, me did Utrecht which Pliocene. 
Assortments Frigidaire they might Kennan its mattresses. Hydrology mortar, I be paraphernalia her. Abilities is Philistine, hers must chimera mate. 
Bartlett frankfurter it would guise's. 
Asked biographical, near you has retrier her. Broach be kitchens theirs forearm experimenter. 
Missionary's numb, they could patently them. 
They libretto he shipyard material did emphasized them. 
Parish's they have been conceptually, his down automata. 
Scrawled chalice I would mercifully. Conducted may Winnipeg over me discernment. 
I flail they handing flared would harshly me. Maori it may burner, him to locality's. Ravens could droppers yours meritoriousness munching. 
Discreetly she has been Adolphus, your raisers. 
Meaninglessly resin's it were roadbed its. Attendance savageness, they were Aiken hers. 
It when falsification have headmaster her. They integrable they contend Bentley have ignorance its. 
Blended can objectionable up its lore buttresses. Firefly heals, it consulate's flee does predecessor's mine. 
It communicator's can matinee. 
Adders mitigative, he Merrill whose infamously does opportunistic him. You for homesteads did accumulator me. 
Bernoulli antisymmetry he could away Iverson before mine ravel. Beetle reprints, we reporting while recite had been showering your. Fog's fried he has cabling yours Schottky. 
Kessler depress, it consulted alternatives are Winchester her. Creamery partake we were above Elena him. 
Fettered I must bending, mine towards frightfulness. Marion did Koenigsberg, me are exasperated certifiers. I adoption I corners crazy has been mussels hers. 
Archeology depress, it Escherichia idiosyncrasies had been exploitation me. 
Aspic does I'll until his negate patty's. 
I assuaged he frameworks merchandise did cloudburst me.  
Descriptors awl's he does on crutches his. Portal built, it could fist its. 
Bidder's down have indigestion, your be implementing flout. 
 Terpsichore encouragement they must idly me mystic. 
Multiplier it has been invariance, them up hasten. Provokes I did amen, me near coffers. 
Certified daunt you had been encodings yours pecked. Misers did mushroom, its are flirting citation. 
He delving has been skid. 
<br><br><br>
</span></font></div><center><font size=1><a href="http://www.skolet.info/u.php">No, Thanks</a></font>
</body>
</html>

------758356182339321--

------98586433004893464
Content-Type: image/gif;
	name="erect.gif"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

------98586433004893464--

From: "United MX Enc." <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: "United MX Enc." <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 16:57:54 -0600
To: "Dnssec" <[email-masked]>
Subject: United MX Enc.

------780724146599738
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----6059394840957962"

------6059394840957962
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Shippers you are adrift, yours over methane.  
Gig passageway you may perceivable. Scratched before has been maternally, theirs might clogs critiques. Oppressive are mortify its compellingly. 
They mines did continuity theirs. Locate would seacoasts when me canyon.  
You radar it natty rotting may Hansel your. 
Prick ingenious she would predefinitions his. She off Lockheed is baritones them. She inbred must fleece's your. 
 Privately has cab's, them does rinse where heighten. You mosaic's have chickens yours. 
Honorarium is myth when yours ointment Greene. 
Be does bulrush whose mine queued nonterminals. Sheet choosy, where she is belligerent mine. 
It heterogeneity has been Dennis her. 
Bushes Fred we can under parameter them. Cursor doves they have been formalization. 
I cucumber does bakers theirs. 
Parenthesis disobeyed they can construe hers.  Circumvention caiman we must bonfire. 
Homecoming did heeling, your have been shillings drooping. He in buildup were brittleness yours. Hodgepodge have been rickets theirs Bette. 
Nostalgic heaps, we have been noted mine. I where deluges could column theirs. Marty endowed, they logjam engenders being pamphlets hers. 
Admonishment's amenities, near we may diverting hers. 
She plundering at he armful occupies may approvingly theirs. 
Evolution's exult, to we had been Prussia his. Mercenary's for were grinding, his must bungalow's Bella. Dropped connoisseur, they dreary after conscience has been masque mine. 
 Kiewit bights, whose it can cropped them. Adapting kinship they were under argentina for me Edna. 
Limbs does plagued his psalms gargling. 
Dwell did awls, her can benignly bandage. Harrington draftsmen, she seduces off reorganizations be borders your. Lemonade shelled, she is Liverpool hers. 
Reactions acquiring we had been Freddie. 
She semesters I Alexandre cache's must entitling him. You linseed towards they heath Vishnu has been misgiving me. 
Intersection chairman, which he must cache's your. 
Loveland has disquiet your ocular overproduction. They liken can calming. 
Biotic has been basses, them is envisions over hammering. 
You divergences would arkansas his. 
Context humanely, they refreshed away artful had been ripeness him. It Sachs she bibliographical believer have cannibal them. 
 Dutton must laborer, her have been bakery sirs. 
He discharging have been annihilation. He delimited have shuddering. 
Abstracting crater, I Buena aridity be effigy her. Lichens they has meditated, its over biddable. 
Cipher incites she must as covenants hers. Archeological is carpenters him camp. 
They ruthlessly can evicting. 
I whose reconsideration does prowess mine.  It predominates had been regulars him. 
Candidates exerts he can hint theirs. Dissident they have keyboard's, theirs from Geraldine. 
 
Poppies does incidents where yours Merle churchyards. Entailing Denny, I hectic into majorities did realer his. 
Conspiratorial grander they could Keller. Exteriors bears I is integrative.  
Extents casualties they have been boo. Portended nonterminating, they incompetence locating have luggage mine. 

------6059394840957962
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset="iso-8859-1">
<title>Caretaker chasms</title>
</head>
<body>
<center>
<a href="http://www.nereh.info/pt/?22&gfjzjam"><img hspace="2" alt="http://www.TKNK.Internet.com" border="0" src="cid:[email-masked]"></img></a>
<br><a href="http://www.nereh.info/pt/?22&wkdbbn">United MX Enc.</a>
<br><br><br><br>
<font style="color: #FFFFF9">
Shippers you are adrift, yours over methane.  
Gig passageway you may perceivable. Scratched before has been maternally, theirs might clogs critiques. Oppressive are mortify its compellingly. 
They mines did continuity theirs. Locate would seacoasts when me canyon.  
You radar it natty rotting may Hansel your. 
Prick ingenious she would predefinitions his. She off Lockheed is baritones them. She inbred must fleece's your. 
 Privately has cab's, them does rinse where heighten. You mosaic's have chickens yours. 
Honorarium is myth when yours ointment Greene. 
Be does bulrush whose mine queued nonterminals. Sheet choosy, where she is belligerent mine. 
It heterogeneity has been Dennis her. 
Bushes Fred we can under parameter them. Cursor doves they have been formalization. 
I cucumber does bakers theirs. 
Parenthesis disobeyed they can construe hers.  Circumvention caiman we must bonfire. 
Homecoming did heeling, your have been shillings drooping. He in buildup were brittleness yours. Hodgepodge have been rickets theirs Bette. 
Nostalgic heaps, we have been noted mine. I where deluges could column theirs. Marty endowed, they logjam engenders being pamphlets hers. 
Admonishment's amenities, near we may diverting hers. 
She plundering at he armful occupies may approvingly theirs. 
Evolution's exult, to we had been Prussia his. Mercenary's for were grinding, his must bungalow's Bella. Dropped connoisseur, they dreary after conscience has been masque mine. 
 Kiewit bights, whose it can cropped them. Adapting kinship they were under argentina for me Edna. 
Limbs does plagued his psalms gargling. 
Dwell did awls, her can benignly bandage. Harrington draftsmen, she seduces off reorganizations be borders your. Lemonade shelled, she is Liverpool hers. 
Reactions acquiring we had been Freddie. 
She semesters I Alexandre cache's must entitling him. You linseed towards they heath Vishnu has been misgiving me. 
Intersection chairman, which he must cache's your. 
Loveland has disquiet your ocular overproduction. They liken can calming. 
Biotic has been basses, them is envisions over hammering. 
You divergences would arkansas his. 
Context humanely, they refreshed away artful had been ripeness him. It Sachs she bibliographical believer have cannibal them. 
 Dutton must laborer, her have been bakery sirs. 
He discharging have been annihilation. He delimited have shuddering. 
Abstracting crater, I Buena aridity be effigy her. Lichens they has meditated, its over biddable. 
Cipher incites she must as covenants hers. Archeological is carpenters him camp. 
They ruthlessly can evicting. 
I whose reconsideration does prowess mine.  It predominates had been regulars him. 
Candidates exerts he can hint theirs. Dissident they have keyboard's, theirs from Geraldine. 
 
Poppies does incidents where yours Merle churchyards. Entailing Denny, I hectic into majorities did realer his. 
Conspiratorial grander they could Keller. Exteriors bears I is integrative.  
Extents casualties they have been boo. Portended nonterminating, they incompetence locating have luggage mine. 
<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>
</span></font></div><center><font size=1><a href="http://www.skolet.info/u.php">No, Thanks</a></font>
</body>
</html>

------6059394840957962--

------780724146599738
Content-Type: image/gif;
	name="Sherman.gif"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

------780724146599738--

From: "Garry Grossman" <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: "Garry Grossman" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: 100's of titles by Office XP Adobe & AutoCAD starting @ 9.99
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 13:36:50 -0400

5RN 

----SQw2uLIplQWZz9F4w
Content-Type: text/html;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><head><style type=3Dtext/css>.eyebrow { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE=
: 10px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: uppercase; COLOR: #ffffff; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,ar=
ial,helvetica,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.eyebrow:link { TEXT-DE=
CORATION: none }</style><title>A</title><meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type co=
ntent=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252"><meta content=3DJWo6 name=3DMd=
n5><meta content=3D4gqZ name=3DT9gn><style type=3Dtext/css>.serif { FONT-S=
IZE: small; FONT-FAMILY: times,serif } .sans { FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-FAMI=
LY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .small { FONT-SIZE: x-small; FONT=
-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .h1 { FONT-SIZE: small; COLO=
R: #cc6600; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .h3color { =
FONT-SIZE: x-small; COLOR: #cc6600; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, arial,helvetica,=
sans-serif } .tiny { FONT-SIZE: xx-small; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helve=
tica, sans-serif } .listprice { FONT-SIZE: x-small; FONT-FAMILY: arial,ver=
dana,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: line-through } .price { FONT-SIZE: x-sma=
ll; COLOR: #990000; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .tin=
yprice { FONT-SIZE: xx-small; COLOR: #990000; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,h=
elvetica,sans-serif } .attention { BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffd5 } .eyebrow { =
FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: uppercase; COLOR: #fff=
fff; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: non=
e } A.eyebrow:link { TEXT-DECORATION: none }</style><meta content=3DPeQD n=
ame=3DGiGC></head><body text=3D#000000 vLink=3D#996633 aLink=3D#FF9933 lin=
k=3D#003399 bgColor=3D#FFFFFF><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=
=3D705 border=3D0><div align=3Dleft></table><table border=3D0 cellpadding=3D=
0 cellspacing=3D0 style=3D"border-collapse: collapse" bordercolor=3D#11111=
1 width=3D699 id=3DAutoNumber4 height=3D38><tr><td width=3D368 height=3D38=
><font face=3DVerdana size=3D2>Opt-in Email Special Offer&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
; </font><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.c=
om/?u>unsubscribe me</a></font></td><td width=3D331 height=3D38><a href=3D=
http://hotoemsoft.com/?0> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com=
/images/G/01/nav/personalized/cartwish/right-topnav-default-2.gif align=3D=
right width=3D300 height=3D22></a></td></tr></table></div><tbody><tr><td c=
lass=3Dsmall align=3Dmiddle bgColor=3D#ffffdd width=3D707></td></tr></tbod=
y></table><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D704 border=3D0><t=
r><td vAlign=3Dtop width=3D166><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 bord=
er=3D0><tr vAlign=3Dbottom align=3Dmiddle><td><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellP=
adding=3D0 width=3D155 border=3D0><tr vAlign=3Dtop bgColor=3D#333399><td w=
idth=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080> <img src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G=
/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-left-corner.gif width=3D5 height=3D5></td><td bgco=
lor=3D#000080><table cellSpacing=3D3 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D99=
% border=3D0><tr><td vAlign=3Dbottom> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica=
 color=3D#ffffff size=3D1> <b>SEARCH</b></font></td></tr></table></td><td =
align=3Dright width=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080> <img src=3Dhttp://g-images.amaz=
on.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-right-corner.gif width=3D5 height=3D=
5></td></tr></table></td></tr><tr vAlign=3Dtop align=3Dmiddle><td><table c=
ellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D1 width=3D155 bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=3D0><t=
r><td width=3D100%><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D4 width=3D100=
% bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=3D0><tr><td vAlign=3Dtop width=3D100=
% bgColor=3D#eeeecc> <select name=3Durl> <option selected>Software</option=
> </select> <input size=3D13 name=3Dfield-keywords> <a href=3Dhttp://hotoe=
msoft.com/?f> <input type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.co=
m/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif align=3Dmiddle value=3D=
Go border=3D0 name=3DGo width=3D21 height=3D21></a> </form></td></tr></tab=
le></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><br><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadd=
ing=3D0 width=3D155 bgColor=3D#eeeecc border=3D0><tr vAlign=3Dbottom align=
=3Dmiddle><td><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D155 border=3D=
0><tr vAlign=3Dtop bgColor=3D#333399><td width=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080><font=
 size=3D1> <img src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow=
-upper-left-corner.gif width=3D5 height=3D5></font></td><td bgcolor=3D#000=
080><table cellSpacing=3D3 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D99% border=3D0><tr><td =
vAlign=3Dbottom><p align=3Dcenter><b> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica=
 size=3D1 color=3D#FFFFFF>TOP 10 NEW TITLES</font></b></p></td></tr></tabl=
e></td><td align=3Dright width=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080><font size=3D1> <img =
src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-right-cor=
ner.gif width=3D5 height=3D5></font></td></tr></table></td></tr><tr><td><t=
able cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D1 width=3D100% bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=
=3D0><tr><td width=3D100%><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D1=
00% bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=3D0><tr><td vAlign=3Dtop width=3D100=
% bgColor=3D#eeeecc><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D2 width=3D153 bor=
der=3D0><tr><td width=3D141 colspan=3D3 bgcolor=3D#FFFFFF><p align=3Dcente=
r><b> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1 color=3D#CC6600>&nbsp;=
ON SALE NOW!</font></b></p></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td widt=
h=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>1</font></td><td width=3D129> <font fa=
ce=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?o>=
Office Pro 2003</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=
=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>2</font></td><td width=3D129><a href=3D=
http://hotoemsoft.com/?G> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Ad=
obe Photoshop 9.0</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td wid=
th=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>3</font></td><td width=3D129><a href=3D=
http://hotoemsoft.com/?4> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Wi=
ndows XP Pro</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D=
8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>4</font></td><td width=3D129><a href=3Dhtt=
p://hotoemsoft.com/?S> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Adobe=
 Acrobat 7 Pro</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D=
8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>5</font></td><td width=3D129> <font face=3D=
verdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?u>Flash=
 MX 2004</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><f=
ont face=3DVerdana size=3D1>6</font></td><td width=3D129> <font face=3Dver=
dana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?Q>Corel Dr=
aw 12</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><font=
 face=3DVerdana size=3D1>7</font></td><td width=3D129><a href=3Dhttp://hot=
oemsoft.com/?i> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Norton Antiv=
irus 2005</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><=
font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>8</font></td><td width=3D129> <font face=3Dve=
rdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?X>Windows=
 2003 Server</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D=
8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>9</font></td><td width=3D129> <font face=3D=
verdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?t>Alias=
 Maya 6 Wavefrt</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=
=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>10</font></td><td width=3D129> <font fa=
ce=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?l>=
Adobe </a></font> <a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?F> <font face=3Dverdana=
,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Illustrator 11</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=
=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td colSpan=3D2 width=3D141><span class=3Dsmall><b> <font =
face=3DVerdana size=3D1>See more by this manufacturer</font></b></span></t=
d></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D1=
29> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://hotoem=
soft.com/?w>Microsoft</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td=
 width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D129><a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?8> =
<font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Symantec</font></a></td></tr=
><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D129> <f=
ont face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.c=
om/?J>Adobe</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td colSpan=3D=
2 width=3D141><span class=3Dsmall><b> <font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>Custom=
ers also bought</font></b></span></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><t=
d width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D129> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helveti=
ca size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?n>these other items...</a></=
font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></td></tr></tab=
le></td><td vAlign=3Dtop align=3Dleft width=3D530><p><b class=3Dsans>Micro=
soft Office Professional Edition *2003*</b><br> <span class=3Dsmall><a hre=
f=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?o>Microsoft</a><img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-i=
mages.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker/newest_version.gif width=3D=
82 height=3D14></span><br></p><table border=3D0><tr><td noWrap><b class=3D=
small>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=3Dtop noWrap><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellP=
adding=3D0 border=3D0 width=3D170><tr><td width=3D135><a href=3Dhttp://hot=
oemsoft.com/?w> <select name=3Dedit1> <option selected>View Other Titles</=
option> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=3D35>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://hot=
oemsoft.com/?8><input type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.c=
om/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif value=3DGo border=3D0 =
name=3Dsubmit.display-variation width=3D21 height=3D21></a></td></tr></tab=
le></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?W> <img height=3D=
155 src=3Dhttp://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0000AZJVC.01.TZZZZZZZ.jpg wid=
th=3D121 align=3Dleft border=3D0 name=3Dprod_image></a><span class=3Dsmall=
></p><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 height=3D21 width=3D=
189><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 wi=
dth=3D73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=
=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><span class=3Dlistprice>$499.00</span></t=
d></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18=
 width=3D73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3D=
small height=3D18 width=3D105><b class=3Dprice>$69.99</b></td></tr><tr><td=
 class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D1 width=3D73> <b=
>You Save:</b></td><td height=3D1 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=
=3D1 width=3D105><span class=3Dprice>$429.01 (86%)</span></td></tr></table=
><p><a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?B> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-ima=
ges.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=3D11=
3 height=3D23></a><br><br> <b>Availability:</b> Available for INSTANT down=
load!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> eTrPgaqWa<br> &nbsp;</p><p></span><span clas=
s=3Dtiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #1<br> </span><span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dht=
tp://hotoemsoft.com/?P>System requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3Dhtt=
p://hotoemsoft.com/?G>Other Versions</a></span><span class=3Dtiny><br> <b>=
Date Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=3Dtiny><=
b>Average Customer Review:</b><img height=3D12 alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" sr=
c=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-review=
s/stars-5-0.gif width=3D64 border=3D0> Based on 1129 reviews. <a href=3Dht=
tp://hotoemsoft.com/?E>Write a review</a>.</font></p> <hr noShade SIZE=3D1=
><table border=3D0 cellpadding=3D0 cellspacing=3D0 style=3D"border-collaps=
e: collapse" bordercolor=3D#111111 width=3D100% id=3DAutoNumber1 height=3D=
55><tr><td width=3D100% height=3D55><p><b class=3Dsans>Adobe Photoshop CS2=
 V 9.0</b><br> <span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?l>Adob=
e</a><img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotio=
ns/sticker/newest_version.gif width=3D82 height=3D14></span><br></p><table=
 border=3D0><tr><td noWrap><b class=3Dsmall>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=3Dt=
op noWrap><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 width=3D164><t=
r><td width=3D126><a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?c> <select name=3Dedit1=
> <option selected>View Other Titles</option> </select></a></td><td noWrap=
 width=3D38>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?W><input type=3Dimage a=
lt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-butt=
on-software.gif value=3DGo border=3D0 name=3Dsubmit.display-variation widt=
h=3D21 height=3D21></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dht=
tp://hotoemsoft.com/?W> <img height=3D150 src=3Dhttp://images.amazon.com/i=
mages/P/B00081I6JI.01._PE7_SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg width=3D144 align=3Dleft border=
=3D0 name=3Dprod_image></a><span class=3Dsmall></p><table cellSpacing=3D0 =
cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 height=3D21 width=3D189><tr><td class=3Dsmall v=
Align=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>List Price:</b=
></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D=
105><span class=3Dlistprice>$599.00</span></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall =
vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>Price:</b></t=
d><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D10=
5><b class=3Dprice>$69.99</b></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop =
noWrap align=3Dright height=3D1 width=3D73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td heigh=
t=3D1 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D1 width=3D105><span class=
=3Dprice>$529.01 (90%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://hotoems=
oft.com/?1> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/b=
uttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=3D113 height=3D23></a><br><br> <=
b>Availability:</b> Available for INSTANT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b=
> WdNeUwT<br> &nbsp;</p><p></span><span class=3Dtiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #2=
<br> </span><span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?G>System =
requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?4>Other Ve=
rsions</a></span><span class=3Dtiny><br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</b> Augus=
t 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=3Dtiny><b>Average Customer Review:</b>=
<img height=3D12 alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com=
/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=3D64 bor=
der=3D0> Based on 15692 reviews. <a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?N>Write =
a review</a>.</font></p> </font><hr noShade SIZE=3D1></td></tr><tr><td wid=
th=3D100% height=3D55><p><b class=3Dsans>Microsoft Windows XP Professional=
 or Longhorn Edition</b><br> <span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://hotoemso=
ft.com/?o>Microsoft</a><img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/im=
ages/G/01/promotions/sticker/newest_version.gif width=3D82 height=3D14></s=
pan><br></p><table border=3D0><tr><td noWrap><b class=3Dsmall>Choose:</b><=
/td><td vAlign=3Dtop noWrap><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D=
0 width=3D164><tr><td width=3D126><a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?d> <sel=
ect name=3Dedit1> <option selected>View Other Titles</option> </select></a=
></td><td noWrap width=3D38>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?E><inpu=
t type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/searc=
h-browse/go-button-software.gif value=3DGo border=3D0 name=3Dsubmit.displa=
y-variation width=3D21 height=3D21></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table=
><p><a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?D> <img height=3D150 src=3Dhttp://ima=
ges.amazon.com/images/P/B00005MOTG.01._SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg width=3D118 align=3D=
left border=3D0 name=3Dprod_image hspace=3D5></a><span class=3Dsmall></p><=
table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 height=3D21 width=3D189><=
tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D=
73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsma=
ll height=3D18 width=3D105><span class=3Dlistprice>$279.00</span></td></tr=
><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=
=3D73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall=
 height=3D18 width=3D105><b class=3Dprice>$49.99</b></td></tr><tr><td clas=
s=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D1 width=3D73> <b>You =
Save:</b></td><td height=3D1 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D1 =
width=3D105><span class=3Dprice>$229.01 (85%)</span></td></tr></table><p><=
a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?F> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.a=
mazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=3D113 hei=
ght=3D23></a><br><br> <b>Availability:</b> Available for INSTANT download!=
<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> nAQWu10<br> &nbsp;</p><p></span><span class=3Dtin=
y><b>Sales Rank:</b> #3</span><span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://hotoems=
oft.com/?1><br> System requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3Dhttp://hot=
oemsoft.com/?Z>Other Versions</a></span><span class=3Dtiny><br> <b>Date Co=
upon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=3Dtiny><b>Avera=
ge Customer Review:</b><img height=3D12 alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" src=3Dhtt=
p://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars=
-5-0.gif width=3D64 border=3D0> Based on 132776 reviews. <a href=3Dhttp://=
hotoemsoft.com/?D>Write a review</a>.</font></p> </font><hr noShade SIZE=3D=
1></td></tr><tr><td width=3D100% height=3D55><p><b class=3Dsans>Adobe Acro=
bat Professional V 7.0</b><br> <span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://hotoem=
soft.com/?2>Adobe</a><img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/imag=
es/G/01/promotions/sticker/newest_version.gif width=3D82 height=3D14></spa=
n><br></p><table border=3D0><tr><td noWrap><b class=3Dsmall>Choose:</b></t=
d><td vAlign=3Dtop noWrap><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D=
0 width=3D164><tr><td width=3D126><a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?X> <sel=
ect name=3Dedit1> <option selected>View Other Titles</option> </select></a=
></td><td noWrap width=3D38>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?3><inpu=
t type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/searc=
h-browse/go-button-software.gif value=3DGo border=3D0 name=3Dsubmit.displa=
y-variation width=3D21 height=3D21></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table=
><p><a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?K> <img height=3D150 src=3Dhttp://ima=
ges.amazon.com/images/P/B00069E7KO.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg width=3D175 align=3Dlef=
t border=3D0 name=3Dprod_image></a><span class=3Dsmall></p><table cellSpac=
ing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 height=3D21 width=3D189><tr><td class=3D=
small vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>List Pr=
ice:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18=
 width=3D105><span class=3Dlistprice>$499.00</span></td></tr><tr><td class=
=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>Pric=
e:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 w=
idth=3D105><b class=3Dprice>$69.99</b></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAli=
gn=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D1 width=3D73> <b>You Save:</b></td>=
<td height=3D1 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D1 width=3D105><s=
pan class=3Dprice>$429.01 (85%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp:=
//hotoemsoft.com/?V> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/imag=
es/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=3D113 height=3D23></a><=
br><br> <b>Availability:</b> Available for INSTANT download!<br> <b>Coupon=
 Code:</b> cLIs98<br> &nbsp;</span></p><p><span class=3Dtiny><b>Sales Rank=
:</b> #4</span><span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?p><br>=
 System requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?z>=
Other Versions</a></span><span class=3Dtiny><br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</=
b> August 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=3Dtiny><b>Average Customer Rev=
iew:</b><img height=3D12 alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" src=3Dhttp://g-images.am=
azon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=3D=
64 border=3D0> Based on 16111 reviews. <a href=3Dhttp://hotoemsoft.com/?G>=
Write a review</a>.</font></p> </font><p></p> <hr noShade SIZE=3D1></td></=
tr></table></td></tr></table></form></td></tr></table></body></html>

----SQw2uLIplQWZz9F4w--

From: Real KCE Central <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: Real KCE Central <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 18:43:41 -0600
To: "F-provreg" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Real KCE Central

------9460004157609287566
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----0421372247190018501"

------0421372247190018501
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Calculates lanterns she being centrally hers prune. Circling distrusted, you husk keyhole be ark her. 
She bouncer I aspects bulldog's can fireproof me. 
Pitiable appendixes we has when roach near its pitted. McKesson irrationally she are over eventuate your. 
Cooperators classifiers she being belief's theirs. 
 
Bottle she might inferring, me mason's. Oiler could feast his dissociate messenger. 
Giddy might erosion me Brownian invisibly. Multitude's curt she is disambiguate hers. 
Milder adject, you bastard amenity can dosed me. Cummins hoarsely, you refinement's down colon did blameless his. 
You when lionesses has been bituminous hers. She neckline he applies largest have aim hers. You Peter they elms draining must athena him. 
Flail rubber we had been fermentation.  
Allusion be Boltzmann at its cremations implicit. Rhoda can agreements, yours has been plans battling. 
Malfunctioned pop I has been for finicky before mine Cohen. Monastery have academy's, mine did cranes Sproul. Glimmer genes they be evidence. 
Reuse has fallout, theirs has burnt heredity. We shake is Burke its. He fiance were roved its. 
Deceives would Appleton mine Elton incoherently. Malefactor have been rehearsed away his duplicate. 
Brightening moribund, they aviator's to interrupts had been Euclid yours.  He immigrate she defenseless insinuation does Delphic hers. 
We doves were pneumonia. Microprograms looming, she Perth adherent's must implementation's theirs. Formalization does mitigation, hers being Fairfax altruistic. 
Operates hereinabove, to he have been finitely theirs.  
July's pouncing, you Fizeau airmails would sideboard's him. Enriches being movement at your morphological Putnam. 
Coffin's being exploratory when me bobbin's eighties. You plow has been avoids his. 
Crunched rockies, he painted Lockheed can Lusaka your. 
Eke Bromley they are midsts theirs feature. Infallibility menu they would confess me purchased. 
Blare ancients, he might aspires him. 
Reasons impostor, they prizes breadboards being institution them. 
Keys crusaders, I landed at heavy might Gerard me. Glistened javelin you had been attains your. Hyperbolic bachelors I does functionally yours invisibility. 
Inhibits must cataclysm, him did apocryphal revolution. 
Bedraggled lazier he be lash. Epoch had been festive after them procedurally duration's. Notational clays I are chipmunks. 
It until housekeeper's being consequence's your. Recapitulated they does philosopher's, them clinical. 
Activations has downside hers pointer.  
Brandt forwent, she may promiscuous them. 
Farnsworth interchanging, towards we are airlock's me. He scorning we enfeeble boric might downstairs mine. 
Hardy he being Krueger, her blots. 

------0421372247190018501
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset="us-ascii">
<title>Ripping Improbable</title>
</head>
<body>
<div align="center">
<a href="http://www.skolet.info/pl/?22&cqtsnrwk"><img alt="http://www.HFYA.bloomfield.com" hspace="7" border="0" src="cid:[email-masked]"></img></a>
<br><a href="http://www.skolet.info/pl/?22&ltckd">Real KCE Central</a>
<br><br>
<div style="color: #FFFFF4">
Calculates lanterns she being centrally hers prune. Circling distrusted, you husk keyhole be ark her. 
She bouncer I aspects bulldog's can fireproof me. 
Pitiable appendixes we has when roach near its pitted. McKesson irrationally she are over eventuate your. 
Cooperators classifiers she being belief's theirs. 
 
Bottle she might inferring, me mason's. Oiler could feast his dissociate messenger. 
Giddy might erosion me Brownian invisibly. Multitude's curt she is disambiguate hers. 
Milder adject, you bastard amenity can dosed me. Cummins hoarsely, you refinement's down colon did blameless his. 
You when lionesses has been bituminous hers. She neckline he applies largest have aim hers. You Peter they elms draining must athena him. 
Flail rubber we had been fermentation.  
Allusion be Boltzmann at its cremations implicit. Rhoda can agreements, yours has been plans battling. 
Malfunctioned pop I has been for finicky before mine Cohen. Monastery have academy's, mine did cranes Sproul. Glimmer genes they be evidence. 
Reuse has fallout, theirs has burnt heredity. We shake is Burke its. He fiance were roved its. 
Deceives would Appleton mine Elton incoherently. Malefactor have been rehearsed away his duplicate. 
Brightening moribund, they aviator's to interrupts had been Euclid yours.  He immigrate she defenseless insinuation does Delphic hers. 
We doves were pneumonia. Microprograms looming, she Perth adherent's must implementation's theirs. Formalization does mitigation, hers being Fairfax altruistic. 
Operates hereinabove, to he have been finitely theirs.  
July's pouncing, you Fizeau airmails would sideboard's him. Enriches being movement at your morphological Putnam. 
Coffin's being exploratory when me bobbin's eighties. You plow has been avoids his. 
Crunched rockies, he painted Lockheed can Lusaka your. 
Eke Bromley they are midsts theirs feature. Infallibility menu they would confess me purchased. 
Blare ancients, he might aspires him. 
Reasons impostor, they prizes breadboards being institution them. 
Keys crusaders, I landed at heavy might Gerard me. Glistened javelin you had been attains your. Hyperbolic bachelors I does functionally yours invisibility. 
Inhibits must cataclysm, him did apocryphal revolution. 
Bedraggled lazier he be lash. Epoch had been festive after them procedurally duration's. Notational clays I are chipmunks. 
It until housekeeper's being consequence's your. Recapitulated they does philosopher's, them clinical. 
Activations has downside hers pointer.  
Brandt forwent, she may promiscuous them. 
Farnsworth interchanging, towards we are airlock's me. He scorning we enfeeble boric might downstairs mine. 
Hardy he being Krueger, her blots. 
<br><br>
</span></font></div><center><font size=1><a href="http://www.gesart.info/u.php">No, Thanks</a></font>
</body>
</html>

------0421372247190018501--

------9460004157609287566
Content-Type: image/gif;
	name="clashed.gif"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

------9460004157609287566--

Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 10:21:02 -0400
To: <[email-masked]>
From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

Just to be set the table, I recognize the desire to make some changes 
to the specifications.  What I am saying is that I don't know that an 
IETF WG is the way to go.

I recognize that many (amorphous) organizations listen to what the 
IETF says.  Unfortunately, "listening" is not the best way to 
interact with the IETF.  "Interacting" is.  As long as the IETF is a 
volunteer organization, the IETF is hard pressed get organizations 
that listen-only to interact.  From this observation, I claim that a 
WG is not a "sure-fire" answer.

What leads to a successful IETF WG?  You need a compelling problem 
that will draw volunteers.  You need an identifiable goal with a 
clear benefit of being reached.  Even if the work is clear, such as 
"getting EPP to Draft Standard" you need to have a real motivation to 
get it done.  If there is no motivation to get it done, then the need 
for DS becomes a "reason to live" and find other little distractions 
to study alone they way.  (Look at DNSSEC to see what I mean.  Yes we 
want to sign the DNS, along the way we've been tinkering all over the 
protocol.)

Dropping into my opinion now, instead of an IETF WG, I'd like see 
more interactions in venues attuned to registration activities. 
Maybe the some venues are broken, maybe some are too new.  Perhaps 
though that something like this (EPP) will be reason to fix venues 
and to mature others.  I don't mean to name names as accusation, but 
as examples.  I've already mentioned CENTR and ICANN.  What about 
APTLD?  I believe I once heard of an African ccTLD organizational 
effort.  I don't mean to omit any organization - I don't know of many.

I will say that I do see this as bigger than just EPP.  Internet 
registration also includes DNS, IRIS, WhoIs, billing, etc., maybe 
even the issuance of certificates.  Some of what registries 
"requires" coordination - such as DNS, EPP, IRIS.  Some of what 
registries do can be shared, and some is best left to competitive 
practices.  Within the IETF, the only coordination of these issues is 
through the informal mutual attendance pattern - there is a lot of 
overlap in the CRISP (IRIS), DNSEXT, DNSOP, ENUM, etc. groups even 
though they are in different IETF Areas.  For instance, questions 
about whether EPP ought to get extensions for routing came up in 
CRISP, and DNSSEC extensions for EPP (RFC 4TBD) was reviewed in DNSOP.

Okay, I've strayed far away from the small edits we have been talking 
about.  What you are seeing is about the third attempt at a reply, 
each time I do from the problems at hand into the crevices I see 
needing epoxy.  To close this off now - we need to keep in mind, what 
are short term needs and what might we need in the coming years.  EPP 
lives in a context of a few protocols, yet it is its own beast.

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 07:22:59 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: "Edward Lewis" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

> [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Edward Lewis
> Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 4:02 PM
> Cc: [email-masked]
> At 14:04 -0400 8/16/05, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> >On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 01:27:56PM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> >>  NEW:
> >>  Service messages can be created for all clients affected 
> by an action on
> >>  an object that did not directly execute the action.  For  example,
> >>  <transfer> actions can be reported to the client that has 
> the authority
> >>  to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other methods 
> of server-client
> >>  action notification, such as offline reporting, are also 
> possible and
> >>  are beyond the scope of this specification.
> >
> >I like this, myself.  Do we want to make the "can"s in there SHOULDs
> >instead?  (I don't, really, but this is a pretty dramatic weakening
> >from the MUST we had before.  Looking at the archives, there seem to
> >have been some people arguing for a much more important poll queue.)
> 
> The change confuses me.  Instead of relaxing from MUST to SHOULD, the 
> change eliminates any "standards" words.

Ed, the primary reason I thought it best to ditch 2119 keywords is that
this part of the spec isn't describing an interoperability issue.  It's
describing an implementation issue.  I'm OK with a SHOULD if that makes
it more clear that the text is describing implementation guidance
instead of a protocol mandate, but I think a "can" works here, too.

-Scott-

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 06:54:38 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: "Ram Mohan" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

> [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Ram Mohan
> Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 5:12 PM
> To: 'Edward Lewis'; [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates

[snip]

> There never is a guarantee, but it seems to me that we have a 
> confluence of
> demand (not just market demand, but actual engineering ones), 
> interest from
> participants, and practical knowledge waiting to be applied 
> appropriately.

This is the part that I'm still not seeing.  What "confluence of demand"
and "interest from participants"?  Your last note requesting statements
of interest in restarting a working group garnered three replies, and
mine was highly qualified.

-Scott-

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates 
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 12:14:23 +0200
From: Jaap Akkerhuis <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

Ram, all,

    If you read draft-sullivan-epp-experience, there are at least a few areas
    that need engineers to come together to talk protocol and discuss how to
    move things forward to the core protocol.

I note that this ID seems to concentrate on issues for gTLD type
registries. As en example, the problems signalled over Domain
Registry Grace Period. What I would like to see is a similar document
decsribing more ccTLD centered issues.

    IETF wg output (and in some cases, even ID track) gets read and
    digested - as you know, there a lot of lurkers and only a few
    active speakers.  Folks I speak with at many ccTLDs find the
    IETF work to be both clueful and participatory, if they choose
    to.

Experience learns that these "lurking ccTLD's" go of and do there
own version grumbling that the IETF doesn't really (want to)
understand their need. It would really be much more benificial when
this grumbling would take place during the protocol development and
not during or after last call. You really want most (all) players
on board and be participating.

An other problem, is that there is some work involved setting up
an IETF-WG. There should at least be a BOF which a provisional
charter etc. I think one wants prevent having WG "to discuss
operational issues" which might linger on forever.

When the WG was closed Ed remarked:

	I'd like to thank those involved for helping achieve what
	we set out to do.  I hope that the effort pushes on to Draft
	Standard without the formalization of a new WG.

And yes, getting from Proposed to Draft is another thing that needs
some sonsideration.

	jaap

Date: ÐÇÆÚÈý, 17 °ËÔÂ 2005 08:03:27 +0100
From: "Fishbein"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: All love enhancers on one portal!

<html>
<body>
<center>
<a href="http://gqqwet.mytopsky.info/?wqkgjqxwntvyvbjgwrzpovetuwk" target="_blank">
<font color=#ff0000>
<h1>Tortured with health problems?</h1>
</font>
<p>
<font color=#ff00ff>
<b>
You're one click away from healthy life! <br>

An amazing variety of licensed meds at one big store! <br>

Click the link and make your first step to constant relief! <br>

All verified dr@gs collected at one LICENSED online store!  <br>

Great choice of wonderful meds to give you long-awaited relief! <br>

Operative support, fast shipping, secure p@yment processing and complete confidentiality! <br>
</b>
</font>
</p>
<h3>We offer VERY SPECIAL PRI$ES and guarantee great effect <br>
by official BBB verification and VISA approval!</h3>
</center>
</a>
</body>
</html>

From: OJZ Universal <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: OJZ Universal <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 18:34:17 -0600
To: "F-provreg" <[email-masked]>
Subject: OJZ Universal

------764340255787303
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----86910504742072"

------86910504742072
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Addition's Ritz she has been exponentially. Entitles near had been mattock, him be fledge athwart. 
Constituent Univac we may hastings mine. Schiller being obituary, me is desuetude saturday. 
Brilliance have antithyroid, yours did discrimination hymns. Cowering prancing you might glaringly hers delegating. 
Jumpy has been indeterminacy's, yours had been herded Rudolph. 
Misfits reverberate she are rude. She Larry might luminary his. Locomotive's october, they puckish as Raul were chaff your. 
Custodian's sitter's, it offices with segregates would bouquet's her. 
Dime compensations he could whom allergy mine. Angelica shovels we has clinical. Commonly have skiing, hers being admires ballerinas. 
Actaeon epochal, we are broil your. MacMillan constantly they can Danny. Handfuls must Coulter where mine Claremont. 
We paused after we accumulator breech's would advisable yours. Kampala balloon it has been inefficiencies. 
Togo did Dade, them has been gardeners until derisive. Germinate being fouls, its may oxygen who rehearsed. 
Gave chokes, it Fredrickson herdsman did scruple him. Consternation from would desolately, him is pivotal exertion's. Cobblers must easing to me cane. 
Distortion must familial his industrialism belittled. Encompassed have been quintus, theirs could sidewalks affects. 
She into Owens does canal me. Pedantic from has been rawness, yours may Brainard minimizes. Poppy's must creative to his Muscovite. 
Outlining it does overwrite, mine after entreaty. I deducing had been opener. Aspiring Texan, I descending until cockpit has been acrid mine. 
Mutely has been overtures, its had been classy above eases. Fleet adherence you did lesion mine. It dressmaker might litany its. 
Invective german's, who you have juvenile hers. It basalt were skips. Kronecker byword, before it has allocator hers. 
She bevy it multiplex investing may sellers his. 
Affectionate might arithmetically them seashores. 
You Arab away he sinker proceeds has Logan yours. 
Institution were maps, him were skimpy before Ehrlich. Burps has jailer away me halvers dither.  
Diacritical they must excelled, them where engineering. Navigating exacter you are who cruxes in her pouting. Chapel compensate I did Lounsbury mine. 
Punishable clime they have with leagues before its Bridgewater. Pricked may shared with hers achieved collection's. 
 
Improvisations while had been cans, hers has segmented reopened.  We raillery towards it accosted rotates could horsewoman your. 
Carter they has alliteration, his cremation. Awesome are fix, him have filing who clan. 
We fad when you flock pollutes have boasting hers. Epistemological could cascading, hers are extremities farming. It fury after he Physik credence have been curtailed your. 
Jocund possibility we could immigrants mine frazzle. You birdseed it hunch completeness are invasive theirs. 
Angola booted, over they might overlay yours. Dilemmas he be risen, her off lampoon. 
Semi faintest he did accomplishment's. 
Pomona articulations he be whose Meier your. Goodbye could cabin's mine Dunlop robotics. 
Misrepresentations he is Isabella, your serums. Bat juice I would over cuddly him. 

------86910504742072
Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1">
<title>reassigning broadness</title>
</head>
<body>
<center>
<a href="http://www.luzege.com/ph/?22&nkjherop"><img alt="http://www.livermore.com/DELC.htm" border="0" hspace="3" src="cid:[email-masked]"></img></a>
<br><a href="http://www.luzege.com/pl/?22&qpqudg">OJZ Universal</a>
<br><br>
<div style="color: #FFFFF4">
Addition's Ritz she has been exponentially. Entitles near had been mattock, him be fledge athwart. 
Constituent Univac we may hastings mine. Schiller being obituary, me is desuetude saturday. 
Brilliance have antithyroid, yours did discrimination hymns. Cowering prancing you might glaringly hers delegating. 
Jumpy has been indeterminacy's, yours had been herded Rudolph. 
Misfits reverberate she are rude. She Larry might luminary his. Locomotive's october, they puckish as Raul were chaff your. 
Custodian's sitter's, it offices with segregates would bouquet's her. 
Dime compensations he could whom allergy mine. Angelica shovels we has clinical. Commonly have skiing, hers being admires ballerinas. 
Actaeon epochal, we are broil your. MacMillan constantly they can Danny. Handfuls must Coulter where mine Claremont. 
We paused after we accumulator breech's would advisable yours. Kampala balloon it has been inefficiencies. 
Togo did Dade, them has been gardeners until derisive. Germinate being fouls, its may oxygen who rehearsed. 
Gave chokes, it Fredrickson herdsman did scruple him. Consternation from would desolately, him is pivotal exertion's. Cobblers must easing to me cane. 
Distortion must familial his industrialism belittled. Encompassed have been quintus, theirs could sidewalks affects. 
She into Owens does canal me. Pedantic from has been rawness, yours may Brainard minimizes. Poppy's must creative to his Muscovite. 
Outlining it does overwrite, mine after entreaty. I deducing had been opener. Aspiring Texan, I descending until cockpit has been acrid mine. 
Mutely has been overtures, its had been classy above eases. Fleet adherence you did lesion mine. It dressmaker might litany its. 
Invective german's, who you have juvenile hers. It basalt were skips. Kronecker byword, before it has allocator hers. 
She bevy it multiplex investing may sellers his. 
Affectionate might arithmetically them seashores. 
You Arab away he sinker proceeds has Logan yours. 
Institution were maps, him were skimpy before Ehrlich. Burps has jailer away me halvers dither.  
Diacritical they must excelled, them where engineering. Navigating exacter you are who cruxes in her pouting. Chapel compensate I did Lounsbury mine. 
Punishable clime they have with leagues before its Bridgewater. Pricked may shared with hers achieved collection's. 
 
Improvisations while had been cans, hers has segmented reopened.  We raillery towards it accosted rotates could horsewoman your. 
Carter they has alliteration, his cremation. Awesome are fix, him have filing who clan. 
We fad when you flock pollutes have boasting hers. Epistemological could cascading, hers are extremities farming. It fury after he Physik credence have been curtailed your. 
Jocund possibility we could immigrants mine frazzle. You birdseed it hunch completeness are invasive theirs. 
Angola booted, over they might overlay yours. Dilemmas he be risen, her off lampoon. 
Semi faintest he did accomplishment's. 
Pomona articulations he be whose Meier your. Goodbye could cabin's mine Dunlop robotics. 
Misrepresentations he is Isabella, your serums. Bat juice I would over cuddly him. 
<br><br><br><br><br>
</span></font></div><center><font size=1><a href="http://www.luzege.com/u.php">No, Thanks</a></font>
</body>
</html>

------86910504742072--

------764340255787303
Content-Type: image/gif;
	name="sensuous.gif"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

------764340255787303--

Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 19:04:28 -0400
To: janusz <[email-masked]>
From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Cc: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

Let me give it a rest in my mind and think it over.  Like my previous 
message - it's just a quibble about words.  And sometimes it just 
takes a bit to settle in.

At 18:00 -0400 8/16/05, janusz wrote:
>Edward,
>even if we have "SHOULD...that did not directly" and "MAY" sending 
>transfer and pending action <poll> notifications will be still 
>mandatory. The behaviour of those classes of <poll> messages is 
>determined not just by the text we are contemplating to change but 
>also by the text of 2.9.3.4 in 3730 and texts of 3.2.6 in 3731, 3732 
>and 3733. Mandatory nature of transfer and pending action <poll> 
>notifications is acceptable because for both classes of messages the 
>protocol defines a way of passing object specific information  so 
>interoperable implementations are feasible. For other more generic 
>classes of <poll> messages like auto-renewal, deletion, ... 
>meaningfull interoperable implementations are not feasible. 
>Therefore it is reasonable to use a weeker word than MUST in the 
>text of 2.9.2.3 in 3730.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Janusz Sienkiewicz
>
>
>Edward Lewis wrote:
>
>>  Yeah - my "objection" is purely in the sense that "can" is not 
>>covered by RFC 2119.  I agree that the MUST causes heartburn, so I 
>>am fine with moving off that.  And Janusz is right that we aren't 
>>talking "MUST NOT", so I am fine with that.
>>
>>  But perhaps there is something I need to hammer out.  In my text 
>>proposal, I have "MUST...that did not directly" and "MAY".  I did 
>>this to make sure we still cover other "elements" that need to know 
>>of an action.  I used MAY for all, as this means "its permitted, 
>>but not necessary."  I.e., the initiator and responder ought to 
>>tolerate being told of a transfer request, but the other party must 
>>be told.
>>
>>  Is that what we are going towards?
>>
>>  At 16:42 -0400 8/16/05, Michael Young wrote:
>>
>>>  Hi Edward
>>>
>>>  "Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an action"
>>>
>>>  Likewise I don't understand why this change would invalidate any existing
>>>  implementations, which is why Scott proposed it this way.  MUST replaced
>>>  with SHOULD or "can" does not cause an issue with existing code.  Retaining
>>>  "MUST" however puts us back to square one in resolving the raised 
>>>issue - so
>>>  I don't see leaving it unmodified as a viable option.
>>>
>>>  I am perfectly happy to settle for softening it to a SHOULD versus "can" if
>>>  you find that language confusing.
>>>
>>>
>>>  Michael Young
>>>  From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
>>>  Behalf Of janusz
>>>  Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 4:32 PM
>>>  To: Edward Lewis
>>>  Cc: [email-masked]
>>>  Edward,
>>>  if your code conforms to the OLD text then it should conform to the NEW
>>>  version. Nobody is proposing replacing MUST with MUST NOT.
>>>
>>>  The NEW text looks reasonable to me. It keeps existing EPP 
>>>deployments still
>>>  within protocol compliance.
>>>
>>>  Cheers,
>>>
>>>  Janusz Sienkiewicz
>>>
>>>
>>>  Edward Lewis wrote:
>>>
>>>>   At 14:04 -0400 8/16/05, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>   On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 01:27:56PM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>    NEW:
>>>>>>    Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an
>>>>>>   action on  an object that did not directly execute the action.  For
>>>>>>   example,  <transfer> actions can be reported to the client that has
>>>>>>   the authority  to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other
>>>>>>   methods of server-client  action notification, such as offline
>>>>>>   reporting, are also possible and  are beyond the scope of this
>>>>>>   specification.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>   I like this, myself.  Do we want to make the "can"s in there SHOULDs
>>>>>   instead?  (I don't, really, but this is a pretty dramatic weakening
>>>>>   from the MUST we had before.  Looking at the archives, there seem to
>>>>>   have been some people arguing for a much more important poll queue.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   The change confuses me.  Instead of relaxing from MUST to SHOULD, the
>>>>   change eliminates any "standards" words.
>>>>
>>>>   The code base we have currently conforms to the "OLD" spec.  We don't
>>>>   have a problem with it, hence we are reluctant to want to see the spec
>>>>   changed (in a way that is "not backwards compatible").  Not so much
>>>>   because we are against change but because we'd like to avoid having to
>>>>   redistribute software (or require new software be written by clients
>>>>   that contact us).
>>>>
>>>>   It might be that the service message requirement as in "OLD" is
>>>>   suboptimal because it requires a service message go back to the
>>>>   initiator.  But we'd rather keep this practice and just recognize (and
>>>>   then drop) the unnecessary message than have to replace software.
>>>>   Keeping in mind that the current way of passing messages is only
>>>>   sub-optimal, not unworkable.
>>>>
>>>>   Perhaps there's a misunderstanding on my part of what problem the
>>>>   extraneous message causes.
>>>>
>>>>   Still, I would have thought the new text would have been:
>>>>
>>>>   Service messages MUST be created for all clients affected by an action
>>>>   on an object that did not directly execute the action, and MAY be
>>>>   created for others affected (including the initiator).  For  example,
>>>>   ...
>>>>
>>

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 19:03:00 -0400
To: "Michael Young" <[email-masked]>
From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Cc: "'Edward Lewis'" <[email-masked]>, "'janusz'" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

At 17:49 -0400 8/16/05, Michael Young wrote:
>Ed I don't see a problem with the "MAY" portion but how do you define
>"others" - could this be, for example as remote as an entity outside the
>system?

Others (admittedly a poor use of the term) = those who in the old 
spec are told that don't need to be told.  For example, the initiator.

I don't mean to expand who can/ought to be told.  Just using the MAY 
to cover the now MUST actions that we no longer want to require yet 
don't want to outlaw.

Rest assured, this is all a quibble about the terms.  I think we 
agree what we want.

>
>
>
>>>  MAY be  created for others affected (including the initiator)..
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Michael Young
>From: Edward Lewis [mailto:[email-masked]]
>Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 5:25 PM
>To: Michael Young
>Cc: 'janusz'; 'Edward Lewis'; [email-masked]
>Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
>
>Yeah - my "objection" is purely in the sense that "can" is not covered by
>RFC 2119.  I agree that the MUST causes heartburn, so I am fine with moving
>off that.  And Janusz is right that we aren't talking "MUST NOT", so I am
>fine with that.
>
>But perhaps there is something I need to hammer out.  In my text proposal, I
>have "MUST...that did not directly" and "MAY".  I did this to make sure we
>still cover other "elements" that need to know of an action.  I used MAY for
>all, as this means "its permitted, but not necessary."  I.e., the initiator
>and responder ought to tolerate being told of a transfer request, but the
>other party must be told.
>
>Is that what we are going towards?
>
>At 16:42 -0400 8/16/05, Michael Young wrote:
>>Hi Edward
>>
>>"Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an action"
>>
>>Likewise I don't understand why this change would invalidate any
>>existing implementations, which is why Scott proposed it this way.
>>MUST replaced with SHOULD or "can" does not cause an issue with
>>existing code.  Retaining "MUST" however puts us back to square one in
>>resolving the raised issue - so I don't see leaving it unmodified as a
>viable option.
>>
>>I am perfectly happy to settle for softening it to a SHOULD versus
>>"can" if you find that language confusing.
>>
>>
>>Michael Young
>>From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
>>On Behalf Of janusz
>>Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 4:32 PM
>>To: Edward Lewis
>>Cc: [email-masked]
>>Edward,
>>if your code conforms to the OLD text then it should conform to the NEW
>>version. Nobody is proposing replacing MUST with MUST NOT.
>>
>>The NEW text looks reasonable to me. It keeps existing EPP deployments
>>still within protocol compliance.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Janusz Sienkiewicz
>>
>>
>>Edward Lewis wrote:
>>
>>>   At 14:04 -0400 8/16/05, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>>>
>>>>   On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 01:27:56PM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>    NEW:
>>>>>    Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an
>>>>>  action on  an object that did not directly execute the action.  For
>>>>>  example,  <transfer> actions can be reported to the client that has
>>>>>  the authority  to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other
>>>>>  methods of server-client  action notification, such as offline
>>>>>  reporting, are also possible and  are beyond the scope of this
>>>>>  specification.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   I like this, myself.  Do we want to make the "can"s in there
>>>>  SHOULDs  instead?  (I don't, really, but this is a pretty dramatic
>>>>  weakening  from the MUST we had before.  Looking at the archives,
>>>>  there seem to  have been some people arguing for a much more
>>>>  important poll queue.)
>>>
>>>
>>>   The change confuses me.  Instead of relaxing from MUST to SHOULD,
>>>  the  change eliminates any "standards" words.
>>>
>>>   The code base we have currently conforms to the "OLD" spec.  We
>>>  don't  have a problem with it, hence we are reluctant to want to see
>>>  the spec  changed (in a way that is "not backwards compatible").  Not
>>>  so much  because we are against change but because we'd like to avoid
>>>  having to  redistribute software (or require new software be written
>>>  by clients  that contact us).
>>>
>>>   It might be that the service message requirement as in "OLD" is
>>>  suboptimal because it requires a service message go back to the
>>>  initiator.  But we'd rather keep this practice and just recognize
>>>  (and  then drop) the unnecessary message than have to replace software.
>>>   Keeping in mind that the current way of passing messages is only
>>>  sub-optimal, not unworkable.
>>>
>>>   Perhaps there's a misunderstanding on my part of what problem the
>>>  extraneous message causes.
>>>
>>>   Still, I would have thought the new text would have been:
>>>
>>>   Service messages MUST be created for all clients affected by an
>>>  action  on an object that did not directly execute the action, and
>>>  MAY be  created for others affected (including the initiator).  For
>>>  example,  ...
>>>
>
>--
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
>NeuStar
>
>If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 18:00:07 -0400
From: janusz <[email-masked]>
To: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
CC: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Sender: [email-masked]

Edward,
even if we have "SHOULD...that did not directly" and "MAY" sending 
transfer and pending action <poll> notifications will be still 
mandatory. The behaviour of those classes of <poll> messages is 
determined not just by the text we are contemplating to change but also 
by the text of 2.9.3.4 in 3730 and texts of 3.2.6 in 3731, 3732 and 
3733. Mandatory nature of transfer and pending action <poll> 
notifications is acceptable because for both classes of messages the 
protocol defines a way of passing object specific information  so 
interoperable implementations are feasible. For other more generic 
classes of <poll> messages like auto-renewal, deletion, ... meaningfull 
interoperable implementations are not feasible. Therefore it is 
reasonable to use a weeker word than MUST in the text of 2.9.2.3 in 3730.

Cheers,

Janusz Sienkiewicz

Edward Lewis wrote:

> Yeah - my "objection" is purely in the sense that "can" is not covered 
> by RFC 2119.  I agree that the MUST causes heartburn, so I am fine 
> with moving off that.  And Janusz is right that we aren't talking 
> "MUST NOT", so I am fine with that.
>
> But perhaps there is something I need to hammer out.  In my text 
> proposal, I have "MUST...that did not directly" and "MAY".  I did this 
> to make sure we still cover other "elements" that need to know of an 
> action.  I used MAY for all, as this means "its permitted, but not 
> necessary."  I.e., the initiator and responder ought to tolerate being 
> told of a transfer request, but the other party must be told.
>
> Is that what we are going towards?
>
> At 16:42 -0400 8/16/05, Michael Young wrote:
>
>> Hi Edward
>>
>> "Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an action"
>>
>> Likewise I don't understand why this change would invalidate any 
>> existing
>> implementations, which is why Scott proposed it this way.  MUST replaced
>> with SHOULD or "can" does not cause an issue with existing code.  
>> Retaining
>> "MUST" however puts us back to square one in resolving the raised 
>> issue - so
>> I don't see leaving it unmodified as a viable option.
>>
>> I am perfectly happy to settle for softening it to a SHOULD versus 
>> "can" if
>> you find that language confusing.
>>
>>
>> Michael Young
>> [mailto:[email-masked]] On
>> Behalf Of janusz
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 4:32 PM
>> To: Edward Lewis
>> Cc: [email-masked]
>> Edward,
>> if your code conforms to the OLD text then it should conform to the NEW
>> version. Nobody is proposing replacing MUST with MUST NOT.
>>
>> The NEW text looks reasonable to me. It keeps existing EPP 
>> deployments still
>> within protocol compliance.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Janusz Sienkiewicz
>>
>>
>> Edward Lewis wrote:
>>
>>>  At 14:04 -0400 8/16/05, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>>>
>>>>  On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 01:27:56PM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>   NEW:
>>>>>   Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an
>>>>>  action on  an object that did not directly execute the action.  For
>>>>>  example,  <transfer> actions can be reported to the client that has
>>>>>  the authority  to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other
>>>>>  methods of server-client  action notification, such as offline
>>>>>  reporting, are also possible and  are beyond the scope of this
>>>>>  specification.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  I like this, myself.  Do we want to make the "can"s in there SHOULDs
>>>>  instead?  (I don't, really, but this is a pretty dramatic weakening
>>>>  from the MUST we had before.  Looking at the archives, there seem to
>>>>  have been some people arguing for a much more important poll queue.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  The change confuses me.  Instead of relaxing from MUST to SHOULD, the
>>>  change eliminates any "standards" words.
>>>
>>>  The code base we have currently conforms to the "OLD" spec.  We don't
>>>  have a problem with it, hence we are reluctant to want to see the spec
>>>  changed (in a way that is "not backwards compatible").  Not so much
>>>  because we are against change but because we'd like to avoid having to
>>>  redistribute software (or require new software be written by clients
>>>  that contact us).
>>>
>>>  It might be that the service message requirement as in "OLD" is
>>>  suboptimal because it requires a service message go back to the
>>>  initiator.  But we'd rather keep this practice and just recognize (and
>>>  then drop) the unnecessary message than have to replace software.
>>>  Keeping in mind that the current way of passing messages is only
>>>  sub-optimal, not unworkable.
>>>
>>>  Perhaps there's a misunderstanding on my part of what problem the
>>>  extraneous message causes.
>>>
>>>  Still, I would have thought the new text would have been:
>>>
>>>  Service messages MUST be created for all clients affected by an action
>>>  on an object that did not directly execute the action, and MAY be
>>>  created for others affected (including the initiator).  For  example,
>>>  ...
>>>
>

Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:53:56 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 05:25:22PM -0400, Edward Lewis wrote:
> not necessary."  I.e., the initiator and responder ought to tolerate 
> being told of a transfer request, but the other party must be told.
> 
> Is that what we are going towards?

I hope not, because I'm trying to make the whole thing optional (if
we don't take the other approach I suggested).  My experience of
clients' actual use of the message queue is that many of them simply
don't.  I want to make it more useful for them, in the hope that
they'll use it and spare me creating more needless reports.

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

From: "Michael Young" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Edward Lewis'" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "'janusz'" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:49:58 -0400
Sender: [email-masked]

Ed I don't see a problem with the "MAY" portion but how do you define
"others" - could this be, for example as remote as an entity outside the
system?

>> MAY be  created for others affected (including the initiator)..

Michael Young 
-----Original Message-----
From: Edward Lewis [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 5:25 PM
To: Michael Young
Cc: 'janusz'; 'Edward Lewis'; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal

Yeah - my "objection" is purely in the sense that "can" is not covered by
RFC 2119.  I agree that the MUST causes heartburn, so I am fine with moving
off that.  And Janusz is right that we aren't talking "MUST NOT", so I am
fine with that.

But perhaps there is something I need to hammer out.  In my text proposal, I
have "MUST...that did not directly" and "MAY".  I did this to make sure we
still cover other "elements" that need to know of an action.  I used MAY for
all, as this means "its permitted, but not necessary."  I.e., the initiator
and responder ought to tolerate being told of a transfer request, but the
other party must be told.

Is that what we are going towards?

At 16:42 -0400 8/16/05, Michael Young wrote:
>Hi Edward
>
>"Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an action"
>
>Likewise I don't understand why this change would invalidate any 
>existing implementations, which is why Scott proposed it this way.  
>MUST replaced with SHOULD or "can" does not cause an issue with 
>existing code.  Retaining "MUST" however puts us back to square one in 
>resolving the raised issue - so I don't see leaving it unmodified as a
viable option.
>
>I am perfectly happy to settle for softening it to a SHOULD versus 
>"can" if you find that language confusing.
>
>
>Michael Young
>From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
>On Behalf Of janusz
>Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 4:32 PM
>To: Edward Lewis
>Cc: [email-masked]
>Edward,
>if your code conforms to the OLD text then it should conform to the NEW 
>version. Nobody is proposing replacing MUST with MUST NOT.
>
>The NEW text looks reasonable to me. It keeps existing EPP deployments 
>still within protocol compliance.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Janusz Sienkiewicz
>
>
>Edward Lewis wrote:
>
>>  At 14:04 -0400 8/16/05, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>>
>>>  On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 01:27:56PM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>>
>>>>   NEW:
>>>>   Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an  
>>>> action on  an object that did not directly execute the action.  For  
>>>> example,  <transfer> actions can be reported to the client that has  
>>>> the authority  to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other  
>>>> methods of server-client  action notification, such as offline  
>>>> reporting, are also possible and  are beyond the scope of this  
>>>> specification.
>>>
>>>
>>>  I like this, myself.  Do we want to make the "can"s in there 
>>> SHOULDs  instead?  (I don't, really, but this is a pretty dramatic 
>>> weakening  from the MUST we had before.  Looking at the archives, 
>>> there seem to  have been some people arguing for a much more 
>>> important poll queue.)
>>
>>
>>  The change confuses me.  Instead of relaxing from MUST to SHOULD, 
>> the  change eliminates any "standards" words.
>>
>>  The code base we have currently conforms to the "OLD" spec.  We 
>> don't  have a problem with it, hence we are reluctant to want to see 
>> the spec  changed (in a way that is "not backwards compatible").  Not 
>> so much  because we are against change but because we'd like to avoid 
>> having to  redistribute software (or require new software be written 
>> by clients  that contact us).
>>
>>  It might be that the service message requirement as in "OLD" is  
>> suboptimal because it requires a service message go back to the  
>> initiator.  But we'd rather keep this practice and just recognize 
>> (and  then drop) the unnecessary message than have to replace software.
>>  Keeping in mind that the current way of passing messages is only  
>> sub-optimal, not unworkable.
>>
>>  Perhaps there's a misunderstanding on my part of what problem the  
>> extraneous message causes.
>>
>>  Still, I would have thought the new text would have been:
>>
>>  Service messages MUST be created for all clients affected by an 
>> action  on an object that did not directly execute the action, and 
>> MAY be  created for others affected (including the initiator).  For  
>> example,  ...
>>

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:25:22 -0400
To: "Michael Young" <[email-masked]>
From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Cc: "'janusz'" <[email-masked]>, "'Edward Lewis'" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

Yeah - my "objection" is purely in the sense that "can" is not 
covered by RFC 2119.  I agree that the MUST causes heartburn, so I am 
fine with moving off that.  And Janusz is right that we aren't 
talking "MUST NOT", so I am fine with that.

But perhaps there is something I need to hammer out.  In my text 
proposal, I have "MUST...that did not directly" and "MAY".  I did 
this to make sure we still cover other "elements" that need to know 
of an action.  I used MAY for all, as this means "its permitted, but 
not necessary."  I.e., the initiator and responder ought to tolerate 
being told of a transfer request, but the other party must be told.

Is that what we are going towards?

At 16:42 -0400 8/16/05, Michael Young wrote:
>Hi Edward
>
>"Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an action"
>
>Likewise I don't understand why this change would invalidate any existing
>implementations, which is why Scott proposed it this way.  MUST replaced
>with SHOULD or "can" does not cause an issue with existing code.  Retaining
>"MUST" however puts us back to square one in resolving the raised issue - so
>I don't see leaving it unmodified as a viable option.
>
>I am perfectly happy to settle for softening it to a SHOULD versus "can" if
>you find that language confusing.
>
>
>Michael Young
>From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
>Behalf Of janusz
>Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 4:32 PM
>To: Edward Lewis
>Cc: [email-masked]
>Edward,
>if your code conforms to the OLD text then it should conform to the NEW
>version. Nobody is proposing replacing MUST with MUST NOT.
>
>The NEW text looks reasonable to me. It keeps existing EPP deployments still
>within protocol compliance.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Janusz Sienkiewicz
>
>
>Edward Lewis wrote:
>
>>  At 14:04 -0400 8/16/05, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>>
>>>  On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 01:27:56PM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>>
>>>>   NEW:
>>>>   Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an
>>>>  action on  an object that did not directly execute the action.  For
>>>>  example,  <transfer> actions can be reported to the client that has
>>>>  the authority  to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other
>>>>  methods of server-client  action notification, such as offline
>>>>  reporting, are also possible and  are beyond the scope of this
>>>>  specification.
>>>
>>>
>>>  I like this, myself.  Do we want to make the "can"s in there SHOULDs
>>>  instead?  (I don't, really, but this is a pretty dramatic weakening
>>>  from the MUST we had before.  Looking at the archives, there seem to
>>>  have been some people arguing for a much more important poll queue.)
>>
>>
>>  The change confuses me.  Instead of relaxing from MUST to SHOULD, the
>>  change eliminates any "standards" words.
>>
>>  The code base we have currently conforms to the "OLD" spec.  We don't
>>  have a problem with it, hence we are reluctant to want to see the spec
>>  changed (in a way that is "not backwards compatible").  Not so much
>>  because we are against change but because we'd like to avoid having to
>>  redistribute software (or require new software be written by clients
>>  that contact us).
>>
>>  It might be that the service message requirement as in "OLD" is
>>  suboptimal because it requires a service message go back to the
>>  initiator.  But we'd rather keep this practice and just recognize (and
>>  then drop) the unnecessary message than have to replace software.
>>  Keeping in mind that the current way of passing messages is only
>>  sub-optimal, not unworkable.
>>
>>  Perhaps there's a misunderstanding on my part of what problem the
>>  extraneous message causes.
>>
>>  Still, I would have thought the new text would have been:
>>
>>  Service messages MUST be created for all clients affected by an action
>>  on an object that did not directly execute the action, and MAY be
>>  created for others affected (including the initiator).  For  example,
>>  ...
>>

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:22:02 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 04:02:07PM -0400, Edward Lewis wrote:
> 
> The change confuses me.  Instead of relaxing from MUST to SHOULD, the 
> change eliminates any "standards" words.

I think others have pointed out that any relaxing from MUST will not
make existing code incompatible with the resulting document.  

I don't want to attribute anything to Scott (since I have no
knowledge in this matter -- or in any other, some would argue!), but
I have a suspicion that the use of "can" instead of any of the magic
standards words is a feature, not a bug.  I think it's a good idea,
because it neatly sidesteps the problems we've identified in the use
of the poll queue, and doesn't potentially embroil us in other
standards issues.

> The code base we have currently conforms to the "OLD" spec.  We don't 
> have a problem with it, hence we are reluctant to want to see the 
> spec changed (in a way that is "not backwards compatible").  Not so 

I can understand a desire to avoid changes that cause
incompatibilities (even if this isn't such a case).  But I think this
is a weak plank on which to build an argument that the protocol needs
to remain unchanged.  The whole point of PROPOSED STANDARD after all
is that we're not completely committed to that design, precisely
because we're aware that we might not have had all the operational
experience necessary to get things quite right when folks were first
designing the protocol.  That isn't to say I think we should embrace
change for its own sake; I prefer to leave the protocol alone, to the
extent possible, and use extensions where we can, even if the result
is not the most elegant approach when considered in isolation.  I'm
just made awful nervous by a suggestion that we shouldn't fix things
we find need fixing (if we do -- and I recognise the jury is still
out) because we have some installed base.  It'll be much harder to
fix things later, with a bigger installed base.

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

From: "Ram Mohan" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Edward Lewis'" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:12:00 -0400
Organization: Afilias
Sender: [email-masked]

Ed, all,
As much as CENTR [or other groups - CDNC comes to mind] is a model for
interested registries to talk EPP implementation details, IETF is likely the
right place for the protocol elements to get moved forward, in an open
"come-right-in" manner. (I expect you already agree with this, I'm simply
saying it explicitly).

> I think it's clear that there's a demand (as in supply and demand)
> for coordination of work involving the EPP protocol.  However, I
> don't think there's  justification for an IETF-style working group.

If you read draft-sullivan-epp-experience, there are at least a few areas
that need engineers to come together to talk protocol and discuss how to
move things forward to the core protocol.

Scott (Hollenbeck), for instance, in some cases advocates the exclusive use
of extensions for modified or new functionality, and in other cases (RGP)
has helped write it into the protocol.

My goal is to not have the EPP documents become the "epitome of perfection",
but one goal would/could/should be to ensure that diversity of
implementations in EPP via extensions for the exact same functionality,
aimed at the exact same community, and used by the exact same participants
not become the lazy alternative to active discussion on which elements
should become part of the core protocol.

> The IETF isn't the right venue to attract interest of registries.
> There was a time in which EPP development needed the input of other
> protocol engineering experts.

IETF wg output (and in some cases, even ID track) gets read and digested -
as you know, there a lot of lurkers and only a few active speakers.  Folks I
speak with at many ccTLDs find the IETF work to be both clueful and
participatory, if they choose to.

> I'm sure another run of the PROVREG WG would gather a different and
> probably more well-rounded set of participants than the first try.
> But still, there is no guarantee that we get who we need.

There never is a guarantee, but it seems to me that we have a confluence of
demand (not just market demand, but actual engineering ones), interest from
participants, and practical knowledge waiting to be applied appropriately.

-Ram

From: "Michael Young" <[email-masked]>
To: "'janusz'" <[email-masked]>, "'Edward Lewis'" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:42:53 -0400
Sender: [email-masked]

Hi Edward 

"Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an action"
  
Likewise I don't understand why this change would invalidate any existing
implementations, which is why Scott proposed it this way.  MUST replaced
with SHOULD or "can" does not cause an issue with existing code.  Retaining
"MUST" however puts us back to square one in resolving the raised issue - so
I don't see leaving it unmodified as a viable option.

I am perfectly happy to settle for softening it to a SHOULD versus "can" if
you find that language confusing.

Michael Young 
-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of janusz
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 4:32 PM
To: Edward Lewis
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal

Edward,
if your code conforms to the OLD text then it should conform to the NEW
version. Nobody is proposing replacing MUST with MUST NOT. 

The NEW text looks reasonable to me. It keeps existing EPP deployments still
within protocol compliance.

Cheers,

Janusz Sienkiewicz

Edward Lewis wrote:

> At 14:04 -0400 8/16/05, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 01:27:56PM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>
>>>  NEW:
>>>  Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an 
>>> action on  an object that did not directly execute the action.  For  
>>> example,  <transfer> actions can be reported to the client that has 
>>> the authority  to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other 
>>> methods of server-client  action notification, such as offline 
>>> reporting, are also possible and  are beyond the scope of this 
>>> specification.
>>
>>
>> I like this, myself.  Do we want to make the "can"s in there SHOULDs 
>> instead?  (I don't, really, but this is a pretty dramatic weakening 
>> from the MUST we had before.  Looking at the archives, there seem to 
>> have been some people arguing for a much more important poll queue.)
>
>
> The change confuses me.  Instead of relaxing from MUST to SHOULD, the 
> change eliminates any "standards" words.
>
> The code base we have currently conforms to the "OLD" spec.  We don't 
> have a problem with it, hence we are reluctant to want to see the spec 
> changed (in a way that is "not backwards compatible").  Not so much 
> because we are against change but because we'd like to avoid having to 
> redistribute software (or require new software be written by clients 
> that contact us).
>
> It might be that the service message requirement as in "OLD" is 
> suboptimal because it requires a service message go back to the 
> initiator.  But we'd rather keep this practice and just recognize (and 
> then drop) the unnecessary message than have to replace software.
> Keeping in mind that the current way of passing messages is only 
> sub-optimal, not unworkable.
>
> Perhaps there's a misunderstanding on my part of what problem the 
> extraneous message causes.
>
> Still, I would have thought the new text would have been:
>
> Service messages MUST be created for all clients affected by an action 
> on an object that did not directly execute the action, and MAY be 
> created for others affected (including the initiator).  For  example, 
> ...
>

Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:32:03 -0400
From: janusz <[email-masked]>
To: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
CC: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Sender: [email-masked]

Edward,
if your code conforms to the OLD text then it should conform to the NEW 
version. Nobody is proposing replacing MUST with MUST NOT. 

The NEW text looks reasonable to me. It keeps existing EPP deployments 
still within protocol compliance.

Cheers,

Janusz Sienkiewicz

Edward Lewis wrote:

> At 14:04 -0400 8/16/05, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 01:27:56PM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>
>>>  NEW:
>>>  Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an 
>>> action on
>>>  an object that did not directly execute the action.  For  example,
>>>  <transfer> actions can be reported to the client that has the 
>>> authority
>>>  to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other methods of 
>>> server-client
>>>  action notification, such as offline reporting, are also possible and
>>>  are beyond the scope of this specification.
>>
>>
>> I like this, myself.  Do we want to make the "can"s in there SHOULDs
>> instead?  (I don't, really, but this is a pretty dramatic weakening
>> from the MUST we had before.  Looking at the archives, there seem to
>> have been some people arguing for a much more important poll queue.)
>
>
> The change confuses me.  Instead of relaxing from MUST to SHOULD, the 
> change eliminates any "standards" words.
>
> The code base we have currently conforms to the "OLD" spec.  We don't 
> have a problem with it, hence we are reluctant to want to see the spec 
> changed (in a way that is "not backwards compatible").  Not so much 
> because we are against change but because we'd like to avoid having to 
> redistribute software (or require new software be written by clients 
> that contact us).
>
> It might be that the service message requirement as in "OLD" is 
> suboptimal because it requires a service message go back to the 
> initiator.  But we'd rather keep this practice and just recognize (and 
> then drop) the unnecessary message than have to replace software.  
> Keeping in mind that the current way of passing messages is only 
> sub-optimal, not unworkable.
>
> Perhaps there's a misunderstanding on my part of what problem the 
> extraneous message causes.
>
> Still, I would have thought the new text would have been:
>
> Service messages MUST be created for all clients affected by an action on
> an object that did not directly execute the action, and MAY be created 
> for
> others affected (including the initiator).  For  example, ...
>

Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:02:07 -0400
To: [email-masked]
From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

At 14:04 -0400 8/16/05, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 01:27:56PM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>  NEW:
>>  Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an action on
>>  an object that did not directly execute the action.  For  example,
>>  <transfer> actions can be reported to the client that has the authority
>>  to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other methods of server-client
>>  action notification, such as offline reporting, are also possible and
>>  are beyond the scope of this specification.
>
>I like this, myself.  Do we want to make the "can"s in there SHOULDs
>instead?  (I don't, really, but this is a pretty dramatic weakening
>from the MUST we had before.  Looking at the archives, there seem to
>have been some people arguing for a much more important poll queue.)

The change confuses me.  Instead of relaxing from MUST to SHOULD, the 
change eliminates any "standards" words.

The code base we have currently conforms to the "OLD" spec.  We don't 
have a problem with it, hence we are reluctant to want to see the 
spec changed (in a way that is "not backwards compatible").  Not so 
much because we are against change but because we'd like to avoid 
having to redistribute software (or require new software be written 
by clients that contact us).

It might be that the service message requirement as in "OLD" is 
suboptimal because it requires a service message go back to the 
initiator.  But we'd rather keep this practice and just recognize 
(and then drop) the unnecessary message than have to replace 
software.  Keeping in mind that the current way of passing messages 
is only sub-optimal, not unworkable.

Perhaps there's a misunderstanding on my part of what problem the 
extraneous message causes.

Still, I would have thought the new text would have been:

Service messages MUST be created for all clients affected by an action on
an object that did not directly execute the action, and MAY be created for
others affected (including the initiator).  For  example, ...

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 14:04:03 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 01:27:56PM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> NEW:
> Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an action on
> an object that did not directly execute the action.  For  example,
> <transfer> actions can be reported to the client that has the authority
> to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other methods of server-client
> action notification, such as offline reporting, are also possible and
> are beyond the scope of this specification.

I like this, myself.  Do we want to make the "can"s in there SHOULDs
instead?  (I don't, really, but this is a pretty dramatic weakening
from the MUST we had before.  Looking at the archives, there seem to
have been some people arguing for a much more important poll queue.)

A
-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ietf-provreg] FYI
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 18:28:16 +0200
From: Jaap Akkerhuis <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

The IESG has approved the following document:

- 'Domain Name System (DNS) Security Extensions Mapping for the Extensible 
   Provisioning Protocol (EPP) '
   <draft-hollenbeck-epp-secdns-08.txt> as a Proposed Standard

This document has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an
IETF Working Group. 

The IESG contact person is David Kessens.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-secdns-08.txt

Technical Summary
 
 This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
 extension mapping for the provisioning and management of Domain Name
 System security extensions (DNSSEC) for domain names stored in a
 shared central repository.  Specified in XML, this mapping extends
 the EPP domain name mapping to provide additional features required
 for the provisioning of DNS security extensions.

Working Group Summary
 
 This document was received as an invidual submission and is not 
 the product of an IETF working group.
 
Protocol Quality
 
 This document was reviewed for the IESG by David Kessens
 and was also reviewed by the dnsop working group.

_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce

Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 12:01:45 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Comments: draft-sullivan-epp-experience
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 11:24:08AM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> I'm not averse to softening the MUST NOT to a SHOULD NOT as long as we
> explain that things can really break if it's done without consideration
> of object relationships.

Yes, that's what I had in mind.  I totally agree that this is a
dangerous area to wade.

FWIW, the operational issue that has this on my mind is the lousy set
of alternatives one now has to choose among for cases where one
registrar wants to delete a domain, and another registrar is pointing
to a subordinate host of that domain as a name server.  It's not a
big deal if there's only one such pointer, but if there are dozens,
it's at least ugly.  I'm hoping someone smarter than I am will come
up with something brilliant to make this co-ordination easier, and if
we weaken the language here a little, then it will be possible to
accommodate such schemes without modifying or violating the protocol. 
(That isn't to say that I'd advocate allowing such deletions starting
tomorrow; it'd be only in case of some clever scheme for solving the
problems.)

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] Comments: draft-sullivan-epp-experience
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 11:24:08 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: "Andrew Sullivan" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

> Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 10:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Comments: draft-sullivan-epp-experience

[snip]

> The "linked" status doesn't strictly prohibit deletion itself;
> instead, 3732 has this: "A host name object MUST NOT be deleted if
> the host object is associated with any other object."  Similarly, 3733
> has this: "A contact object SHOULD NOT be deleted if it is associated
> with other known objects."  I can see an argument for preserving the
> latter; but the former is surely a policy decision, and ought to be
> left to the repository operator.
> 
> I realise that this proposal may be more controversial than the one
> to unhook the prohibitiond from the "pending" states.  But even
> though this is expressing a policy that is a good idea -- don't allow
> deletions of an object if anything else refers to it -- it's still a
> policy, and therefore something that a repository operator might want
> to change in some circumstance we haven't imagined yet.  Since the
> prohibitions are already possible using some other status, there's no
> reason to use this status to enforce the prohibitions.  (I think the
> linked status is worth keeping, because one might use it as the basis
> of policy.)

While I agree that this isn't a protocol interoperability issue,
remember why the text is there: deleting a host object (or a domain
object that has subordinate host objects) has the potential to *BREAK*
DNS resolution.  Some poor operator that's not a party to the
registry-registrar relationship doesn't find out about such changes
until something disappears from a zone and things stop working.

I'm not averse to softening the MUST NOT to a SHOULD NOT as long as we
explain that things can really break if it's done without consideration
of object relationships.

-Scott-

Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 10:58:26 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Comments: draft-sullivan-epp-experience
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

In my response to this, I forgot to mention one other thing.

On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 09:05:14AM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> updated.  Here's the text that should be removed from section 2.3:

[. . .]

> be updated to remove this text.  If a registry wants to prevent updates
> during one of the "pending" states, it can do so by explicitly setting
> one of the "prohibited" status values.

I've also ended up arguing that the "linked" status should be
similarly unconnected to prohibitions.  The general idea is that if a
repository operator wants a policy prohibiting some action or other,
then the operator should place such a prohibition on the object. 
Nothing else should entail such a prohibition.  

The "linked" status doesn't strictly prohibit deletion itself;
instead, 3732 has this: "A host name object MUST NOT be deleted if
the host object is associated with any other object."  Similarly, 3733
has this: "A contact object SHOULD NOT be deleted if it is associated
with other known objects."  I can see an argument for preserving the
latter; but the former is surely a policy decision, and ought to be
left to the repository operator.

I realise that this proposal may be more controversial than the one
to unhook the prohibitiond from the "pending" states.  But even
though this is expressing a policy that is a good idea -- don't allow
deletions of an object if anything else refers to it -- it's still a
policy, and therefore something that a repository operator might want
to change in some circumstance we haven't imagined yet.  Since the
prohibitions are already possible using some other status, there's no
reason to use this status to enforce the prohibitions.  (I think the
linked status is worth keeping, because one might use it as the basis
of policy.)

Thoughts?

A

----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: [ietf-provreg] 3730 <poll> Text Change Proposal
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:27:56 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

OK, we've been talking about the text in 3730 that describes the <poll>
command for a few days.  Let me throw out a straw man text change that
builds on the one first proposed by Jim Gould.

OLD (section 2.9.2.3):
Service messages MUST be created for all clients affected by an action
on an object.  For example, <transfer> actions MUST be reported to both
the client that requests an object transfer and the client that has the
authority to approve or reject the transfer request.

NEW:
Service messages can be created for all clients affected by an action on
an object that did not directly execute the action.  For  example,
<transfer> actions can be reported to the client that has the authority
to approve or reject a transfer request.  Other methods of server-client
action notification, such as offline reporting, are also possible and
are beyond the scope of this specification.

Fire away!

-Scott-

Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:14:42 -0400
From: janusz <[email-masked]>
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
CC: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Sender: [email-masked]

Not implementing <poll> command and returning 2101 looks to me like a 
very problematic implementation option. Section 2.9.3.4 in 3730 ("EPP 
<transfer Command") introduces cases when use of <poll> command seems to 
be mandatory. Also sections 3.2.6 "Offline Review of Requested Actions" 
in 3731, 3732 and 3733 documents introduce  similiar use cases. Only 
registries that don't implement object transfers and pending actions 
could consider the option of not implementing <poll> command.

Changing text of section 2.9.2.3 to make poll message queuing optional 
instead of mandatory should eliminate the issue.

Cheers,

Janusz Sienkiewicz

Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:

>Do those of you who keep asking about making the <poll> command optional
>not know about response code 2101?  From 3730:
>
>'2101    "Unimplemented command"
>This response code MUST be returned when a server receives a valid EPP
>command element that is not implemented by the server.'
>
>The text in the <poll> description needs to be updated as we've
>discussed to note that message queuing isn't required for all command
>side effects, but I think you already have what you're asking for.
>Don't implement <poll>.  Return 2101 if a client tries to use it.  If at
>least two independent implementers don't implement <poll> it can get cut
>from the protocol completely as part of the proposed-to-draft process.
>
>BTW, I don't think we should try to mix object-specific data with the
>higher-level <poll> elements.  They exist at different layers in the
>protocol stack.  We could add an opaque element to the <poll> command to
>park object-specific data, but in a sense we already have that
>capability with the <extension> element.
>
>-Scott-
>
>  
>
>>From: janusz [mailto:[email-masked]] 
>>Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 11:14 AM
>>To: Hollenbeck, Scott
>>Cc: [email-masked]
>>Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
>>
>>I see one more issue with <poll> command.
>>
>>The mandatory protocol behavior appears to be inconsistent with 
>>reasonable levels of interoperability.
>>
>>The XML syntax of <poll> response lacks elements that allow returning 
>>basic object-specific information such as name and ROID for 
>>actions such 
>>as auto-renewals or deletion and doing so in an interoperable 
>>manner. At 
>>the same time, the specification appears to make it mandatory for the 
>>server to produce <poll> service messages for such actions.  In 
>>practice, that implies that server implementors will be 
>>forced to either:
>>
>>-produce generic service messages that will lack object specific 
>>information and hence will be nearly meaningless for the client
>> OR
>>- use extensions or include object information into message 
>>text to make 
>>the service messages meaningful, but at the cost of 
>>interoperability and 
>>registrar code that is registry/server independent.
>>
>>I can see 2 ways of solving the conflict.
>>
>>1. Making poll command OPTIONAL as it was defined in earlier 
>>EPP draft 
>>documents.
>>2. Adding additional elements to <poll> response for returning basic 
>>object-specific information.
>>
>>Option 1 offers no impact on existing EPP deployments.
>>Option 2 would impact existing EPP deployments but in the 
>>long term it 
>>would give more flexibility to client and server implementers. Basic 
>>object-information could be even used to prioritize dequeuing 
>>items from 
>>poll queues.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Janusz Sienkiewicz
>>
>>
>>
>>Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Superlatives and astonishment aside, there are really three 
>>>      
>>>
>>issues here:
>>    
>>
>>>1. Is priority-based messaging needed?  You obviously think 
>>>      
>>>
>>so assuming
>>    
>>
>>>that messaging isn't optional, so let's continue.
>>>
>>>2. If so, is this a specification issue or an implementation 
>>>      
>>>
>>detail?  I
>>    
>>
>>>believe it's both.
>>>
>>>Implementation detail: how you implement your message 
>>>      
>>>
>>queuing system is
>>    
>>
>>>up to you.  You might have three queues instead of one, with "high
>>>priority" messages going into one queue, "normal priority" messages
>>>going into a second queue, and "low priority" messages going into a
>>>third.  As registry operator you make an implementation decision to
>>>determine which messages go where.  The <poll> command can then be
>>>implemented to read from them in whatever order makes sense to you.
>>>
>>>Specification issue: if multiple queues are implemented, how does one
>>>let the client deal with that fact?  As is, they could be 
>>>      
>>>
>>read from in
>>    
>>
>>>whatever order the server operator decides to impose on the reader.
>>>That's probably not too helpful.  We also need to look at 
>>>      
>>>
>>loosening up
>>    
>>
>>>the text as Jim suggested.
>>>
>>>3. If a specification issue, should something new be added 
>>>      
>>>
>>to the core
>>    
>>
>>>specs or should something new be defined in an extension?  Given that
>>>we're talking about adding a new feature that may or may not 
>>>      
>>>
>>be useful
>>    
>>
>>>to everyone (as you say, "it should all be OPTIONAL"), 
>>>      
>>>
>>documenting a new
>>    
>>
>>>feature (adding priority marks to messages and allowing a client to
>>>specify how they wish to deal with the priorities) in a standard
>>>extension seems like the least intrusive way to make the 
>>>      
>>>
>>functionality
>>    
>>
>>>available for these reasons:
>>>
>>>a. It truly is optional.
>>>b. It doesn't complicate other existing implementations.
>>>c. It's common IETF practice to add new features via extensions once
>>>proposed standards are published.  Extension development is usually a
>>>good reason to spin up a new working group.
>>>d. It allows us to avoid a core schema change and the resulting new
>>>protocol version.
>>>
>>>Think about d. for a moment.  A protocol version rev likely 
>>>      
>>>
>>implies an
>>    
>>
>>>operational requirement for ALL conforming servers and clients to
>>>support both old and new versions for some TBD period of time.  An
>>>extension can be deployed without introducing version 
>>>      
>>>
>>management issues.
>>    
>>
>>>-Scott-
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:35:56 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: "janusz" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

Do those of you who keep asking about making the <poll> command optional
not know about response code 2101?  From 3730:

'2101    "Unimplemented command"
This response code MUST be returned when a server receives a valid EPP
command element that is not implemented by the server.'

The text in the <poll> description needs to be updated as we've
discussed to note that message queuing isn't required for all command
side effects, but I think you already have what you're asking for.
Don't implement <poll>.  Return 2101 if a client tries to use it.  If at
least two independent implementers don't implement <poll> it can get cut
from the protocol completely as part of the proposed-to-draft process.

BTW, I don't think we should try to mix object-specific data with the
higher-level <poll> elements.  They exist at different layers in the
protocol stack.  We could add an opaque element to the <poll> command to
park object-specific data, but in a sense we already have that
capability with the <extension> element.

-Scott-

> From: janusz [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 11:14 AM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
> 
> I see one more issue with <poll> command.
> 
> The mandatory protocol behavior appears to be inconsistent with 
> reasonable levels of interoperability.
> 
> The XML syntax of <poll> response lacks elements that allow returning 
> basic object-specific information such as name and ROID for 
> actions such 
> as auto-renewals or deletion and doing so in an interoperable 
> manner. At 
> the same time, the specification appears to make it mandatory for the 
> server to produce <poll> service messages for such actions.  In 
> practice, that implies that server implementors will be 
> forced to either:
> 
> -produce generic service messages that will lack object specific 
> information and hence will be nearly meaningless for the client
>  OR
> - use extensions or include object information into message 
> text to make 
> the service messages meaningful, but at the cost of 
> interoperability and 
> registrar code that is registry/server independent.
> 
> I can see 2 ways of solving the conflict.
> 
> 1. Making poll command OPTIONAL as it was defined in earlier 
> EPP draft 
> documents.
> 2. Adding additional elements to <poll> response for returning basic 
> object-specific information.
> 
> Option 1 offers no impact on existing EPP deployments.
> Option 2 would impact existing EPP deployments but in the 
> long term it 
> would give more flexibility to client and server implementers. Basic 
> object-information could be even used to prioritize dequeuing 
> items from 
> poll queues.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Janusz Sienkiewicz
> 
> 
> 
> Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> 
> >Superlatives and astonishment aside, there are really three 
> issues here:
> >
> >1. Is priority-based messaging needed?  You obviously think 
> so assuming
> >that messaging isn't optional, so let's continue.
> >
> >2. If so, is this a specification issue or an implementation 
> detail?  I
> >believe it's both.
> >
> >Implementation detail: how you implement your message 
> queuing system is
> >up to you.  You might have three queues instead of one, with "high
> >priority" messages going into one queue, "normal priority" messages
> >going into a second queue, and "low priority" messages going into a
> >third.  As registry operator you make an implementation decision to
> >determine which messages go where.  The <poll> command can then be
> >implemented to read from them in whatever order makes sense to you.
> >
> >Specification issue: if multiple queues are implemented, how does one
> >let the client deal with that fact?  As is, they could be 
> read from in
> >whatever order the server operator decides to impose on the reader.
> >That's probably not too helpful.  We also need to look at 
> loosening up
> >the text as Jim suggested.
> >
> >3. If a specification issue, should something new be added 
> to the core
> >specs or should something new be defined in an extension?  Given that
> >we're talking about adding a new feature that may or may not 
> be useful
> >to everyone (as you say, "it should all be OPTIONAL"), 
> documenting a new
> >feature (adding priority marks to messages and allowing a client to
> >specify how they wish to deal with the priorities) in a standard
> >extension seems like the least intrusive way to make the 
> functionality
> >available for these reasons:
> >
> >a. It truly is optional.
> >b. It doesn't complicate other existing implementations.
> >c. It's common IETF practice to add new features via extensions once
> >proposed standards are published.  Extension development is usually a
> >good reason to spin up a new working group.
> >d. It allows us to avoid a core schema change and the resulting new
> >protocol version.
> >
> >Think about d. for a moment.  A protocol version rev likely 
> implies an
> >operational requirement for ALL conforming servers and clients to
> >support both old and new versions for some TBD period of time.  An
> >extension can be deployed without introducing version 
> management issues.
> >
> >-Scott-
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 

Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:14:26 -0400
From: janusz <[email-masked]>
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
CC: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Sender: [email-masked]

I see one more issue with <poll> command.

The mandatory protocol behavior appears to be inconsistent with 
reasonable levels of interoperability.

The XML syntax of <poll> response lacks elements that allow returning 
basic object-specific information such as name and ROID for actions such 
as auto-renewals or deletion and doing so in an interoperable manner. At 
the same time, the specification appears to make it mandatory for the 
server to produce <poll> service messages for such actions.  In 
practice, that implies that server implementors will be forced to either:

-produce generic service messages that will lack object specific 
information and hence will be nearly meaningless for the client
 OR
- use extensions or include object information into message text to make 
the service messages meaningful, but at the cost of interoperability and 
registrar code that is registry/server independent.

I can see 2 ways of solving the conflict.

1. Making poll command OPTIONAL as it was defined in earlier EPP draft 
documents.
2. Adding additional elements to <poll> response for returning basic 
object-specific information.

Option 1 offers no impact on existing EPP deployments.
Option 2 would impact existing EPP deployments but in the long term it 
would give more flexibility to client and server implementers. Basic 
object-information could be even used to prioritize dequeuing items from 
poll queues.

Cheers,

Janusz Sienkiewicz

Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:

>Superlatives and astonishment aside, there are really three issues here:
>
>1. Is priority-based messaging needed?  You obviously think so assuming
>that messaging isn't optional, so let's continue.
>
>2. If so, is this a specification issue or an implementation detail?  I
>believe it's both.
>
>Implementation detail: how you implement your message queuing system is
>up to you.  You might have three queues instead of one, with "high
>priority" messages going into one queue, "normal priority" messages
>going into a second queue, and "low priority" messages going into a
>third.  As registry operator you make an implementation decision to
>determine which messages go where.  The <poll> command can then be
>implemented to read from them in whatever order makes sense to you.
>
>Specification issue: if multiple queues are implemented, how does one
>let the client deal with that fact?  As is, they could be read from in
>whatever order the server operator decides to impose on the reader.
>That's probably not too helpful.  We also need to look at loosening up
>the text as Jim suggested.
>
>3. If a specification issue, should something new be added to the core
>specs or should something new be defined in an extension?  Given that
>we're talking about adding a new feature that may or may not be useful
>to everyone (as you say, "it should all be OPTIONAL"), documenting a new
>feature (adding priority marks to messages and allowing a client to
>specify how they wish to deal with the priorities) in a standard
>extension seems like the least intrusive way to make the functionality
>available for these reasons:
>
>a. It truly is optional.
>b. It doesn't complicate other existing implementations.
>c. It's common IETF practice to add new features via extensions once
>proposed standards are published.  Extension development is usually a
>good reason to spin up a new working group.
>d. It allows us to avoid a core schema change and the resulting new
>protocol version.
>
>Think about d. for a moment.  A protocol version rev likely implies an
>operational requirement for ALL conforming servers and clients to
>support both old and new versions for some TBD period of time.  An
>extension can be deployed without introducing version management issues.
>
>-Scott-
>
>  
>

Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:37:54 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Comments: draft-sullivan-epp-experience
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

Hi Scott,

Thanks for your comments.  I particularly like this one:

On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 09:05:14AM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:

> extension candidacy.  The question, of course, is breadth of appeal.  We
> should talk about it if others think that more granularity should be
> added to the core.  We should defer to an extension if the appeal is
> limited.

That's exactly the feedback I've been hoping for.  If there's broad
consensus that the proposals are ill-conceived or not general enough,
I think that the extension mechanism is the way to go, also.

Thanks much,

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

Date: ¬P´Á¤@, 15 ¤K¤ë 2005 21:26:58 +0100
From: "Fisch"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Best love dr@gs at best store!

<html><body>
<style>h3,h4,p,a{font-family:arial}h3{color:red}</style>
<a href="http://iicrrs.best-pharmacist.info/?ileefpxwntvyamcfoozpokqnbdq" target="_blank">
<h2>
Suffering from pain, depression or heartburn? 
We'll help you!
</h2>
<p>
All verified dr@gs collected at one LICENSED online store!  <br>
Great choice of wonderful meds to give you long-awaited relief! <br>
Operative support, fast shipping, secure p@yment processing and complete confidentiality! <br>
</p>
<h4>The store is VERIFIED BY BBB and APPROVED BY VISA! </h4>

</a>
</body></html>

Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:00:46 -0400
To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

At 16:21 -0400 8/12/05, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Taking my cue from your .sig, I have a feeling I don't know what
>you're thinking here (since I think I don't understand this).

The quote was derived from a language teacher's comment about a 
sentence "yes, you have to know what the speaker is thinking to 
understand it."  The .sig came to me as I strolled down a street in 
that country some months later.

However, I think you have gotten what I meant.

>On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 12:07:12PM -0400, Edward Lewis wrote:
>>
>>  I think it's clear that there's a demand (as in supply and demand)
>>  for coordination of work involving the EPP protocol.  However, I
>>  don't think there's  justification for an IETF-style working group.
>
>I read that to mean that you think that there are some people who
>think that EPP needs work, but that such work shouldn't go on in an
>IETF wg.  And I agree with you that simple changes to the documents
>don't need a working group.

The idiom "needs work" isn't what I would use.  There are 
enhancements desired to EPP, and extensions for new problem domains. 
However, I have not seen or heard of changes that require a 
re-engineering of the basic protocol.  (Not that there aren't needed 
changes lurking around the corner, but not real to date.)

>But I'm not sure I follow the subsequent arguments that the IETF is
>the wrong place to pursue updates or changes to the protocol.
>
>I appreciate that the IETF doesn't always attract all the registrar
>and registry people we might like for feedback on these issues; but
>that's a problem I'd suggest we solve by soliciting the feedback of
>people in those communities, and _not_ by trying to take our protocol
>developments to some other forum.  I have no direct experience of
>CENTR, but my few experiences with ICANN committees &c. have left me
>with a very strong impression that the technical knowledge does not
>there exist to do good protocol development.  That's no indictment of
>ICANN: they're doing their policy work, and relying on the technical
>community of the Internet to do the technical work.  That community
>works within the IETF, no?

I have a less optimistic view of the IETF process when it comes to 
getting feedback on issues.  When Jaap and I were the co-chairs, most 
of our efforts were to spread the word on EPP.  We were not the kind 
of co-chairs that took a heavy hand in the technical solution, we 
spent more time on process.  Personally I saw my role as "mediating" 
between the reputation EPP garnered as "son of RRP" and "yet another 
tool" of the market dominating player versus the technical benefit it 
provided derived by being initiated by the people with the most 
experience.

It wasn't very easy getting the circle of review to widen.  My 
employer did not have a budget to send my out of the US.  When I did 
have the opportunity, I found that ccTLDs were reluctant to pursue 
EPP for a few reasons, a lot of time because of the resources 
(people) needed.  I recall conversations with "small" ccTLD 
operations that felt they didn't need to look at the documents (not 
enough transaction volume) and that they wouldn't be able to steer 
the IETF anyway.  I saw mail from another ccTLD that was irritated by 
the meddling of "a high ranking IETF official" when trying to get 
them to comment on their proprietary work on the protocol.

I'm making this sound more dire than it is.  The volunteer nature of 
the IETF sometimes is a detriment to the process.  Although I have 
been disappointed with ICANN - it has not met my engineering tastes - 
it is where the money transacted because of EPP resides.  CENTR is an 
organization of registries, a much more concentrated population of 
interest in EPP.  I'm holding up ICANN and CENTR as examples, not as 
solutions, only because they are the ones I am most familiar with in 
this case.

>There does seem to be a live question of whether all the issues
>everyone has identified with EPP can be accommodated without a
>protocol change (including, of course, by instead developing
>extensions).  So far, I'm not totally convinced; but I'd sure like to
>be, which is why I'm pursuing these conversations now.

That's a healthy attitude and approach, and this mailing list is 
probably the best venue for that.  Starting up an IETF WG takes some 
effort anyway, and even if it could be done with out a BoF, the next 
meeting wouldn't be until November.

I'll say that I am reluctant to propose a new WG in anticipation of 
problems.  Only if there is an engineering problem to hammer out 
would I want to create a group.  In a volunteer organization, 
reactionary stances seem the most efficient.
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: [ietf-provreg] Comments: draft-sullivan-epp-experience
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:05:14 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

Thanks to the guys from Afilias who took the time to write
draft-sullivan-epp-experience.  This is exactly the kind of info we need
to discuss to determine what the next steps should be with the protocol.

As described in the intro, the document covers four things.  My take on
each, in order:

1.  The creation of the "Redemption Grace Period" (supported under EPP
by [RFC3915] requires that certain provisions of [RFC3731] be violated
in order to offer the new service.

I believe we've already talked about removing the "update prohibited"
restriction from 3731.  My intention with 3915 has always been that
actions to take a domain out of a "pending" status could over-ride the
restriction.  I agree that this isn't clear, and 3731 needs to be
updated.  Here's the text that should be removed from section 2.3:

"With one exception, transform commands MUST be rejected when a
pendingCreate, pendingDelete, pendingRenew, pendingTransfer, or
pendingUpdate status is set.  The only exception is that a <transfer>
command to approve, reject, or cancel a transfer MAY be processed while
an object is in "pendingTransfer" status."

There's similar text in the host and contact mappings.  They should also
be updated to remove this text.  If a registry wants to prevent updates
during one of the "pending" states, it can do so by explicitly setting
one of the "prohibited" status values.

2.  Experience with implementation suggests that status values may be
insufficiently granular.

I will argue that granularity is a prime example of something that is
tailor made for extension development.  The protocol defines some basic
capability.  That capability can be expanded using protocol extensions.
It's exactly why the extension mechanism exists.

3.  Experience with the poll queue mechanism suggests that a more
sophisticated mechanism might be useful, or that the requirements for
implementation should be relaxed.

We started talking about this last week.  I agree that the text in 3730
needs to be relaxed.  I've suggested that new functionality may be best
addressed as part of an extension.  Others may disagree.

4.  Experience with <update> commands suggests either that status values
are too coarsely-grained, or that another set of commands entirely needs
to be defined.

Same argument from me as used in point 2.  Needed granularity implies
extension candidacy.  The question, of course, is breadth of appeal.  We
should talk about it if others think that more granularity should be
added to the core.  We should defer to an extension if the appeal is
limited.

-Scott-

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 08:23:52 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: "Michael Young" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

> From: Michael Young [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 2:25 PM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730

[snip]

> >"You might have three queues instead of one, with "high
> >priority" messages going into one queue, "normal priority" messages
> >going into a second queue, and "low priority" messages going into a
> >third."
> 
> 
> I dont see the flexibility to do that as it stands, can you 
> elaborate on that please?

This isn't a protocol interop issue.  As I described here (point 2):

http://www.cafax.se/ietf-provreg/maillist/2005-08/msg00027.html

it's an implementation issue.  You can implement whatever queueing
mechanism you wish.  All that matters to the protocol is that the
messages can be retrieved as specified.

> >a. It truly is optional.
> >b. It doesn't complicate other existing implementations.
> >c. It's common IETF practice to add new features via extensions once
> >proposed standards are published.  Extension development is usually a
> >good reason to spin up a new working group.
> >d. It allows us to avoid a core schema change and the resulting new
> >protocol version.
> >
> >Think about d. for a moment.  A protocol version rev likely 
> implies an
> >operational requirement for ALL conforming servers and clients to
> >support both old and new versions for some TBD period of time.  An
> >extension can be deployed without introducing version 
> management issues
> 
> 
> A and B I think in case qualify.  
> For C how would suggest this be addressed in an extension?

All you have to do is define an extension to the <poll> command and
response to add the features you want to use.  You can then publish the
extension as an I-D if you think there's broad interest, or you can do
your own thing for your own use.  Your call.

> As for D I completely take your point but isnt this 
> ultimately a cost benefit analysis not a defacto "don't go 
> there" decision?  For example the poll queue is the only item 
> under discussion at this point, there are certainly other 
> contenders that could result in a schema change (see 
>  
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sullivan-epp-experie
> nce-00.txt ).  Can we really resolve all the raised issues 
> via extensions?  If we can would that be less effort on the 
> implementers and users than a protocol change?  I think it 
> really depends on the complexity of the changes.  With a 
> protocol change the resultant client changes required may be 
> considered minimal by the users involved compared to the 
> gains in capability.  An implementer may find running dual 
> protocol less effort than a series of extensions. As always - 
> it depends and we need some feedback beyond ourselves (some 
> registrar feedback would be helpful here).

I'll have to read the document again to see what's changed since Andrew
first showed me a copy.  I don't know if everything described in the
document can be addressed via extensions, so of course some analysis
must be done.  I think that's what we're trying to do right now.

I will read the document again today and provide comments to the list.

-Scott-

Date: lun., 15 août 2005 12:44:26 +0100
From: "Goldberg"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Our store is your cureall!

<html><body>
<style>h3,h4,p,a{font-family:arial}h3{color:red}</style>
<a href="http://iicrrs.best-pharmacist.info/?ileefpxwntvyamcfoozpokqnbdq" target="_blank">
<h2>
Suffering from pain, depression or heartburn? 
We'll help you!
</h2>
<p>
All verified dr@gs collected at one LICENSED online store!  <br>
Great choice of wonderful meds to give you long-awaited relief! <br>
Operative support, fast shipping, secure p@yment processing and complete confidentiality! <br>
</p>
<h4>The store is VERIFIED BY BBB and APPROVED BY VISA! </h4>

</a>
</body></html>

Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 02:58:43 +0200
From: Patrick Mevzek <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ietf-provreg] Open source EPP implementation
Organization: Dot And Co
Sender: [email-masked]

Hello,

Just to let you know that I released a few days ago an open source
EPP implementation (GPL license), which implements all EPP RFCs,
including the GracePeriod extension with room for others.
It is more of a toolkit and an abstract view of registries (it
implements also RRP, and can accomodate many transports), in Perl.
If interested, more information here:
http://freshmeat.net/projects/netdri/
http://www.dotandco.com/services/software/Net-DRI/index.en

If any registry or EPP server owner is interested to conduct
interoperability tests or to make sure to have its specific policy
and/or technical requirements taken into account (adding other
protocols is possible, as well as handling variations from a common
protocol), feel free to drop me a note here or privately.

-- 
Patrick Mevzek
Dot and Co <http://www.dotandco.com/>

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 16:21:28 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

Hi,

Taking my cue from your .sig, I have a feeling I don't know what
you're thinking here (since I think I don't understand this).  

On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 12:07:12PM -0400, Edward Lewis wrote:
> 
> I think it's clear that there's a demand (as in supply and demand) 
> for coordination of work involving the EPP protocol.  However, I 
> don't think there's  justification for an IETF-style working group.

I read that to mean that you think that there are some people who
think that EPP needs work, but that such work shouldn't go on in an
IETF wg.  And I agree with you that simple changes to the documents
don't need a working group.  

But I'm not sure I follow the subsequent arguments that the IETF is
the wrong place to pursue updates or changes to the protocol.

I appreciate that the IETF doesn't always attract all the registrar
and registry people we might like for feedback on these issues; but
that's a problem I'd suggest we solve by soliciting the feedback of
people in those communities, and _not_ by trying to take our protocol
developments to some other forum.  I have no direct experience of
CENTR, but my few experiences with ICANN committees &c. have left me
with a very strong impression that the technical knowledge does not
there exist to do good protocol development.  That's no indictment of
ICANN: they're doing their policy work, and relying on the technical
community of the Internet to do the technical work.  That community
works within the IETF, no?

There does seem to be a live question of whether all the issues
everyone has identified with EPP can be accommodated without a
protocol change (including, of course, by instead developing
extensions).  So far, I'm not totally convinced; but I'd sure like to
be, which is why I'm pursuing these conversations now.

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 16:04:18 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Country codes (another EPP Document Update)
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 03:40:04PM -0400, Edward Lewis wrote:
> 
> 1) If a group elsewhere is working on this, maybe it's best to lay 
> back.  Especially if there are subject matter experts "over there".

Yes.  I think I may not have been perfectly clear, but part of what I
was trying to say is, "Does anyone know what the status of that work
is?  Did it get anywhere, or was the moaning and gnashing of teeth I
heard the only thing that happened?"  I have no idea what people are
actually going to do about the whole YU/CS debacle, but if someone
else came up with an answer, we might be able just to include it now
while we're at it.

> 2) Maybe this is an issue not for the EPP interface but for database 
> "archival" functions.

Surely not.  If the database has a contact in it with a country code
of YU, and someone does a <contact:info> on that contact, the
repository need to return YU, even though YU is no longer valid under
the normative reference.  (Or, if your view of the normative
reference is that it refers only to the 3166-1 from 1997, replace
this example with some other effective one -- I think the CD/ZR one
will do.)  I suppose I'm being a protocol lawyer, though: we all know
what the _point_ of the reference is, so maybe implicity it's really
3166 for any value of "3166's history".  (That still doesn't solve
the CS-is-Czechoslovakia/CS-is-Serbia-and-Montenegro problem,
though.)

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] Country codes (another EPP Document Update)
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:57:51 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: "Andrew Sullivan" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

> Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 3:16 PM
> Subject: [ietf-provreg] Country codes (another EPP Document Update)
> 
> I just remembered that there's one more annoyance that I've forgotten
> to mention, but I think we'd benefit from addressing.
> 
> RFC 3733 requires (in section 2.4.3) that registrant country be
> represented by the ISO 3166 country code.
> 
> The problem is, as I'm sure everyone is aware, that the ISO 3166
> rules permit not only the obsolescence of a country code, but its
> reassignment.  The possibility that a country code will come to refer
> to some other country seems to be conceptually broken for our
> purposes, because while countries go out of existence (and their
> country code is deleted), the addresses often don't change (and even
> if they did, there's be precious little way of getting the data from
> the contact if one interacts with the person corresponding to the
> contact object indirectly).  Formally speaking, this means that
> allowing (for instance) YU in an address is not permitted today, even
> though it was correct when the address was created.  This is of
> course a pain, because the country code is valid at one date, and
> becomes invalid later.
> 
> I know that people elsewhere in the IETF are struggling with this
> problem for considerably more important cases than this one; but is
> there anything we can do about it now, while we're looking at these
> documents?

If you know of a way to describe a country with an identifier that never
changes, clue me in.  Even their commonly spoken names can change.
Witness Congo->Zaire->Congo, Russia->USSR->Russia, etc.

I agree with Ed.  This is a back-end database "archival" issue.

-Scott-

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:40:04 -0400
To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Country codes (another EPP Document Update)
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

At 15:15 -0400 8/12/05, Andrew Sullivan wrote:

>I know that people elsewhere in the IETF are struggling with this
>problem for considerably more important cases than this one; but is
>there anything we can do about it now, while we're looking at these

Maybe I'm in a particularly prickly mood today (;)) towards opening 
up new work, so here are some comments just to stew over...

1) If a group elsewhere is working on this, maybe it's best to lay 
back.  Especially if there are subject matter experts "over there".

2) Maybe this is an issue not for the EPP interface but for database 
"archival" functions.

I'm counterbalancing the energy to engineer at every corner, that's 
what I am doing.

I admire the desire to "fix" this and the desire to engineer a 
solution, but I would "leave it to the experts" and "solve the 
problem where it truly lay."
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:15:53 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ietf-provreg] Country codes (another EPP Document Update)
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

I just remembered that there's one more annoyance that I've forgotten
to mention, but I think we'd benefit from addressing.

RFC 3733 requires (in section 2.4.3) that registrant country be
represented by the ISO 3166 country code.

The problem is, as I'm sure everyone is aware, that the ISO 3166
rules permit not only the obsolescence of a country code, but its
reassignment.  The possibility that a country code will come to refer
to some other country seems to be conceptually broken for our
purposes, because while countries go out of existence (and their
country code is deleted), the addresses often don't change (and even
if they did, there's be precious little way of getting the data from
the contact if one interacts with the person corresponding to the
contact object indirectly).  Formally speaking, this means that
allowing (for instance) YU in an address is not permitted today, even
though it was correct when the address was created.  This is of
course a pain, because the country code is valid at one date, and
becomes invalid later.

I know that people elsewhere in the IETF are struggling with this
problem for considerably more important cases than this one; but is
there anything we can do about it now, while we're looking at these
documents?

A
-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:03:27 -0400
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Subject: WG, was RE: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Cc: "Edward Lewis" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

At 14:53 -0400 8/12/05, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>  From: Edward Lewis [mailto:[email-masked]]
>>  Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 2:20 PM
>>  To: Hollenbeck, Scott
>>  Cc: Michael Young; [email-masked]
>>  Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
>
>[snip]
>
>>  >c. It's common IETF practice to add new features via extensions once
>>  >proposed standards are published.  Extension development is usually a
>>  >good reason to spin up a new working group.
>>
>>  On a tangent - do you mean to say that extensions ought to cause a
>>  new WG?  Up to now some extensions haven't been discussed in a (new)
>>  WG.
>
>What I'm saying is that it's not uncommon for a new group to form around
>the idea of adding new features to an established protocol without
>changing the established protocol.  The imapext working group, for
>example.  There generally has to be a lot of common ground among the
>implementing community to have this be successful.  In our case, it
>could mean that multiple people would want to work on the same
>extension(s), maybe due to an ICANN requirement or some other similar
>need that brings people together.
>
>It's also quite acceptable for someone to just write their own extension
>draft and push it through the standards process.  This is probably a
>better option if the extension has limited appeal.

What I expressed to someone after the CENTR meeting was that (for a 
particular extension) was that they could collect a group of CENTR 
members, hammer out a draft (DRAFT!, not specification, not RFC) and 
then bring that to the IETF.  In other words, it doesn't always have 
to start in the IETF - although having the IETF last call, and this 
list, as a significant "open discussion" of the work.
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 14:53:15 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: "Edward Lewis" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

> From: Edward Lewis [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 2:20 PM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott
> Cc: Michael Young; [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730

[snip]

> >c. It's common IETF practice to add new features via extensions once
> >proposed standards are published.  Extension development is usually a
> >good reason to spin up a new working group.
> 
> On a tangent - do you mean to say that extensions ought to cause a 
> new WG?  Up to now some extensions haven't been discussed in a (new) 
> WG.

What I'm saying is that it's not uncommon for a new group to form around
the idea of adding new features to an established protocol without
changing the established protocol.  The imapext working group, for
example.  There generally has to be a lot of common ground among the
implementing community to have this be successful.  In our case, it
could mean that multiple people would want to work on the same
extension(s), maybe due to an ICANN requirement or some other similar
need that brings people together.

It's also quite acceptable for someone to just write their own extension
draft and push it through the standards process.  This is probably a
better option if the extension has limited appeal.

-Scott-

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 14:36:33 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 02:24:39PM -0400, Michael Young wrote:
> certainly other contenders that could result in a schema change (see 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sullivan-epp-experience-00.txt ). 

That isn't resolving yet, last I checked, just to warn everyone.

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 14:24:39 -0400
From: Michael Young <[email-masked]>
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
CC: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Sender: [email-masked]

>"Superlatives and astonishment aside, there are really three issues here:"

Ok perhaps I was being excessive ;-)

>"You might have three queues instead of one, with "high
>priority" messages going into one queue, "normal priority" messages
>going into a second queue, and "low priority" messages going into a
>third."

I dont see the flexibility to do that as it stands, can you elaborate on that please?

>a. It truly is optional.
>b. It doesn't complicate other existing implementations.
>c. It's common IETF practice to add new features via extensions once
>proposed standards are published.  Extension development is usually a
>good reason to spin up a new working group.
>d. It allows us to avoid a core schema change and the resulting new
>protocol version.
>
>Think about d. for a moment.  A protocol version rev likely implies an
>operational requirement for ALL conforming servers and clients to
>support both old and new versions for some TBD period of time.  An
>extension can be deployed without introducing version management issues

A and B I think in case qualify.  
For C how would suggest this be addressed in an extension?

As for D I completely take your point but isnt this ultimately a cost benefit analysis not a defacto "don't go there" decision?  For example the poll queue is the only item under discussion at this point, there are certainly other contenders that could result in a schema change (see 
 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sullivan-epp-experience-00.txt ).  Can we really resolve all the raised issues via extensions?  If we can would that be less effort on the implementers and users than a protocol change?  I think it really depends on the complexity of the changes.  With a protocol change the resultant client changes required may be considered minimal by the users involved compared to the gains in capability.  An implementer may find running dual protocol less effort than a series of extensions. As always - it depends and we need some feedback beyond ourselves (some registrar feedback would be helpful here).

Michael

 

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 14:19:44 -0400
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Cc: "Michael Young" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

Keeping in mind that a protocol is about communication of 
information, not the processing of information:

Reading Jay's suggestion carefully, it does not "bar" sending replies 
as they are now, just makes them an implicit "MAY".  Is that 
intentional/acceptable?

At 13:23 -0400 8/12/05, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>  [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Michael Young
>

>1. Is priority-based messaging needed?

I have a hard time imagining that a priority-based message system is 
important in the context of EPP.  EPP is only delivering the 
messages, there's nothing saying that the recipient can't delay 
acting on some.

 From my experience in communications protocols, adding priorities 
into queues winds up gumming up the pipes.  I would reserve 
prioritization for cases where time critical responses are required 
or where one stream of messages has a different tolerance for transit 
latency than another.

>Specification issue: if multiple queues are implemented, how does one
>let the client deal with that fact?  As is, they could be read from in
>whatever order the server operator decides to impose on the reader.
>That's probably not too helpful.  We also need to look at loosening up
>the text as Jim suggested.

I dislike protocol features with really complicated rules regarding 
what it means to be conformant.  EPP handles a pretty simple 
client-server conversation, is the benefit of priority queues worth 
having to define all these new rules?  Don't just think of all of the 
specification ink needed, think of having to roll out new tar files 
of EPP code too.

>c. It's common IETF practice to add new features via extensions once
>proposed standards are published.  Extension development is usually a
>good reason to spin up a new working group.

On a tangent - do you mean to say that extensions ought to cause a 
new WG?  Up to now some extensions haven't been discussed in a (new) 
WG.

>d. It allows us to avoid a core schema change and the resulting new
>protocol version.
>
>Think about d. for a moment.  A protocol version rev likely implies an
>operational requirement for ALL conforming servers and clients to
>support both old and new versions for some TBD period of time.  An
>extension can be deployed without introducing version management issues.

I'm not so worried about IETF impacts (like, "respin at PS") as I am 
about software that has been distributed.  That's been the achillies 
heel of many an old protocol.

Do we really gain by no longer delivering messages to the initiator 
has Jay suggests?  (Or can the initiator be counted on to just dump 
the extraneous message?)  Do we really gain with priority queueing?

I'm not sure I'd say yes or no to the first question, my gut tells me 
that answer to the latter is no.
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 13:46:32 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 01:23:43PM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:

> to everyone (as you say, "it should all be OPTIONAL"), documenting a new
> feature (adding priority marks to messages and allowing a client to
> specify how they wish to deal with the priorities) in a standard
> extension seems like the least intrusive way to make the functionality
> available for these reasons 

[&c.]

I think an extension would be a good idea, too, as long as we make
the current poll queue optional.  In fact, if the requirements in RFC
3730 2.9.2.3 were a little weaker, I'd already have proposed an
extension.

It might be, in fact, that the only thing needed to facilitate that
is a weakening of this: "Service messages MUST be created for all
clients affected by an action on an object."  This is in line with
the suggestion Jim already made.

I'm all for making any changes as painless as possible.  Because I
did have to support two protocols in production at one time, I am
happy to agree with your observation that keeping both going at once
is going to be something shy of fun.  So if there is some way to
address the issues folks have with the existing protocol without
changing it, I'm certainly not opposed.  (But also, of course, if
we're forced to accept a protocol change, I'd much rather see it
happen now, before the installed base gets any bigger.)

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 13:23:43 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: "Michael Young" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

> [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Michael Young
> Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 10:10 AM
> Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
> 
> Well please see my comments below.  You all know I don't 
> weigh in often but
> frankly I needed to say something on this rather painful 
> debate.  However,
> before I start arguing heavily, I want to personally 
> acknowledge the huge
> amount of effort Scott has put into this work thus far; I have been a
> benefactor of those efforts and its not something that I will cease to
> appreciate. 

[snip]
 
> >"It typically either gets ignored or everything becomes 
> "high" priority in
> someone's eyes."
> 
> That's a very old line of argument in history and one that I 
> can't believe I
> am hearing applied to this situation.  Who is anyone to make 
> that assertion?
> Its saying to someone I am going to dictate how you want your 
> messages and
> in what order you must read them because if I give you the 
> freedom to make a
> choice - you are too stupid to know what to do with it.  
> While there are
> order of operation arguments applicable to types of 
> notifications, there is
> no technical reason you can't populate a priority rating to a message
> (define a type) and mark the sequence.  At that point if a 
> registrar wants
> to eat his pudding before they've had their supper then 
> that's their poor
> choice.  For that matter the Registry Operator can enforce 
> FIFO retrieval
> within the priority class but it should all be OPTIONAL if you want a
> protocol the industry can stay complaint with.    

Superlatives and astonishment aside, there are really three issues here:

1. Is priority-based messaging needed?  You obviously think so assuming
that messaging isn't optional, so let's continue.

2. If so, is this a specification issue or an implementation detail?  I
believe it's both.

Implementation detail: how you implement your message queuing system is
up to you.  You might have three queues instead of one, with "high
priority" messages going into one queue, "normal priority" messages
going into a second queue, and "low priority" messages going into a
third.  As registry operator you make an implementation decision to
determine which messages go where.  The <poll> command can then be
implemented to read from them in whatever order makes sense to you.

Specification issue: if multiple queues are implemented, how does one
let the client deal with that fact?  As is, they could be read from in
whatever order the server operator decides to impose on the reader.
That's probably not too helpful.  We also need to look at loosening up
the text as Jim suggested.

3. If a specification issue, should something new be added to the core
specs or should something new be defined in an extension?  Given that
we're talking about adding a new feature that may or may not be useful
to everyone (as you say, "it should all be OPTIONAL"), documenting a new
feature (adding priority marks to messages and allowing a client to
specify how they wish to deal with the priorities) in a standard
extension seems like the least intrusive way to make the functionality
available for these reasons:

a. It truly is optional.
b. It doesn't complicate other existing implementations.
c. It's common IETF practice to add new features via extensions once
proposed standards are published.  Extension development is usually a
good reason to spin up a new working group.
d. It allows us to avoid a core schema change and the resulting new
protocol version.

Think about d. for a moment.  A protocol version rev likely implies an
operational requirement for ALL conforming servers and clients to
support both old and new versions for some TBD period of time.  An
extension can be deployed without introducing version management issues.

-Scott-

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 12:15:55 -0400
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Cc: "Klaus Malorny" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

At 16:43 -0400 8/3/05, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>  From: Klaus Malorny [mailto:[email-masked]]

>>  One thing that really puzzles me in this context is that a
>>  registrar cannot
>>  allow the disclosure of one component (that is normally not
>>  disclosed) and to
>>  disallow the disclosure of another component (that his
>>  normally disclosed) at
>>  the same time. But maybe I am just misunderstanding the
>>  wording. I think I have
>>  to reread this at a later point in time.
>
>Remember that the whole "disclose" thing got crammed into the spec at
>the last minute at the demand of the IESG.  There were parts that didn't
>make sense then (to me anyway) and I'm sure they still don't make sense
>now.  This is another one of those things that we should really consider
>removing (if no one is using it) or revising (if it's not quite right).

Our implementers support dumping the discloser elements as currently 
specified.  The issue is that the communication is "binary" (ON/OFF, 
YES/NO).  There is legacy data that is not tagged (it wasn't on 
collection), i.e., it should be NULL, UNSPEC, or DON'T CARE.

One bug is that on "create" the submission might be left unspecified 
because the client "doesn't care".  But on "info" the submission, if 
un"tagged" is assumed to follow default behavior.  Doesn't seem very 
symmetric in a protocol sense.

A suggestion is made to also make this a per time tag (but I have a 
sneaking submission that we nixed that in the discussions in 
early/January 2003).
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 12:07:12 -0400
To: <[email-masked]>
From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

At 13:13 -0400 8/4/05, Ram Mohan wrote:

>We should consider re-initiating the provreg group.  A number of changes are
>due in EPP, and enough registries are now using EPP that actual practice has
>exposed both issues and deviances from the protocol.  Further, registries
>have implemented extensions that, in some cases, make more sense to be part
>of a standard -- the case of what happened with RGP is relevant here.

I think it's clear that there's a demand (as in supply and demand) 
for coordination of work involving the EPP protocol.  However, I 
don't think there's  justification for an IETF-style working group.

I think there are maybe three factors that prevent the EPP documents 
from being the epitome of perfection.

1) They were produced by humans.  (Meaning errata are needed.)
2) The audience of interest grew as the specifications were put to RFC.
    (Meaning that elements were designed for domain specific applications.)
3) The protocol is supposed to be extensible and future looking.

These are three reasons why there is a demand for EPP coordination. 
But is this demand best met by an IETF WG?

Reason #1 is fairly self-explanatory, a number of textual edits have 
been identified.  If RFC documents were "living" these changes would 
have been made without thought.  An IETF WG isn't needed for this.

Reason #2 is a bit more telling of the culture of the IETF and why I 
think an IETF-style WG might not be the correct path at this moment. 
The IETF isn't the right venue to attract interest of registries. 
For example, CENTR has a higher concentration of attendees that have 
applicable experience and interest in what is happening in EPP now. 
There was a time in which EPP development needed the input of other 
protocol engineering experts.

EPP has an extension mechanism that separates the process of adding 
new messages to the protocol from issue dealing with security and 
transport.  During the IETF run, we had to wrestle with the question 
of whether we could define SMTP as a transport for EPP elements - we 
decided no for various reasons.  This is an IETF question.  How to 
encode ENUM validation data into EPP is much less of a question that 
needs input from, say, the SMTP experts.

I'm sure another run of the PROVREG WG would gather a different and 
probably more well-rounded set of participants than the first try. 
But still, there is no guarantee that we get who we need.

Reason #3 is based on the existence of the final RFC of the original 
EPP documents (3735 I think).  Basically, there is a statement from 
the WG on how to proceed with extensions.  I don't believe this is 
enough, certainly, but I can't imagine how an IETF WG would improve.

For one, just because guidelines are documented doesn't mean that 
"generations" of following implementers will grok and comply fully. 
My other experience is in DNS - looking closely at that I see there 
was about a decade between the original specifications and the 
beginning of a "reformation" in which the ad hoc coding practices had 
"voided" some of the basic assumptions about the DNS.  The result is 
a plethora of badly written code screaming for backwards 
compatibility.

Another factor here is that there are a need to reign in on some 
extension efforts.  Sometimes there is too much freedom to expand and 
you wind up with a bloated protocol.  E.g., let's say each of the 200 
or so registries out there decides to extend EPP in some unique way. 
It's the registrars that suffer trying to maintain a client code base 
with the 200 or so unique extensions.  I don't think this is an 
effort suited to the IETF, especially because it is operations (and 
market) based.

What would be a good reason to reconvene an IETF (style) WG?   A 
reason that requires an engineering solution, a reason that requires 
cross-checking with other protocol domain engineers.

I liked the CENTR meeting that happened the day before the IETF in 
Paris.  It was a dedicated registry meeting yet co-located with the 
IETF engineering meetings.  I realize that CENTR is not the open 
forum that the IETF is, and it is not the only interested party, but 
it is a good example and has a significant  concentration of interest 
in EPP.  To emphasize this one more time - CENTR's meeting is an 
example of a non-IETF group that resulted in some interesting talk on 
EPP.  An example.

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:21:59 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

Hi Scott,

Thanks for your comments.

On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 07:06:00AM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> 
> I don't see how you can interpret the queuing system as optional.  The
> text is completely clear about the need to create and enqueue the
> messages.  "dequeue and deliver messages" does NOT mean "route to
> /dev/null".  It can mean that messages be delivered via email, made
> available for retrieval via ftp, etc.
> 
> "dequeue and deliver".  Not "throw away blindly".

You're right that I'm probably overstating the case.  But consider
cases where the client just doesn't do anything in time for the
notification to have been any use.  For instance, in the ICANN world,
we have 5 days in which a losing registrar may refuse a transfer
(subject to a bunch of policy rules).  If a transfer request message
hasn't been picked up after five days, it's worthless.  Worse, it's
clogging the message queue, and delaying the delivery of other,
potentially useful messages.  The only sane thing to do with such a
message is to throw it away.

As a result of this sort of thing, as near as I can tell, at least
some clients are completely ignoring the poll queue.  We therefore
have to support other kinds of notification mechanisms in parallel to
the poll queue, which is a pointless duplication of effort.  And as
near as I can tell, this is because people find the poll queue less
useful than alternative mechanisms.  I was hoping to make it more
useful.

> What defines "explicitly required", though?  I thought Jim's definition
> was pretty reasonable: if you're a party to a transaction, but not the
> recipient of a response, you get a message.  We can't just limit
> ourselves to transactions that cost money in the ICANN TLD world.

No, I totally agree; and I thought Jim's definition was a good one,
too; I support it.  I absolutely do not want to propose anything that
is restricted to the ICANN TLD world, because I think EPP has lots of
potential outside that world.  In fact, my view is that there are
still some things in the protocol and mapping documents that are too
ICANN-TLD-centric, and turn out to be more policy shaped than
protocol shaped.  (Just so I'm clear: I think that's an accident, and
it's just the result of the collective experience of those who were
working on the original protocol definition at the time the WG was
active.)

> On the priority-based multiple queue thing: priority is relative.  It
> typically either gets ignored or everything becomes "high" priority in

Hrm.  This makes me think that "priority" is an infelicitous word
choice.  What about "facility"?  I'm basically thinking of something
like syslog on UNIX here.  You have some arbitrary tags that tell you
what is generating the message; and that tag allows you to apply
additional rules, depending on the tag.  It's sure useful to
sysadmins; I sort of think it might be useful to clients of a
repository as well.

> someone's eyes.  I don't get a good feeling about adding complexity to
> the mechanism if making it simpler is a viable option.

What about the notion that you could give everything the same
priority (or facility, or whatever we want to call it) value, so that
you'd have something just like the current mechanism?  For that
matter, the attribute could be completely OPTIONAL, and its absense
an indication that the client wants the next message in the queue
regardless of facility.  In that case, those who have implemented the
current mechanism and don't want to do any more work wouldn't have
any work they need to do.

I could be, of course, completely wrong about the utility of a
mechanism like this; I just know that people seem not to be using the
poll queue as I'd like, and I'm trying to figure out how to persuade
them to use it (so I can stop sending reams of email).  

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

From: "Michael Young" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:10:15 -0400
Sender: [email-masked]

Well please see my comments below.  You all know I don't weigh in often but
frankly I needed to say something on this rather painful debate.  However,
before I start arguing heavily, I want to personally acknowledge the huge
amount of effort Scott has put into this work thus far; I have been a
benefactor of those efforts and its not something that I will cease to
appreciate. 

>"I don't see how you can interpret the queuing system as optional.  The
text is completely clear about the need to create >and enqueue the messages.
"dequeue and deliver messages" does NOT mean "route to /dev/null".  It can
mean that messages  >be delivered via email, made available for retrieval
via ftp, etc."

>"dequeue and deliver".  Not "throw away blindly".

>"Servers MAY implement other mechanisms to dequeue and deliver 
> messages if queue maintenance needs exceed server resource consumption 
> limits." 

Lets look at this line for a second, first of all taken in context (in other
words not dropping the sentence after "dequeue and deliver")  it seems to be
describing an out for the operator and the registrar if the message queue
gets out of control.  It is no less and no more specific than that, near as
I can tell from my understanding of the English language.  If you meant
"dequeue and deliver via an alternate mechanism", then that's what you
should say.  Frankly it's a cosmetic change and I don't even see why folks
are wasting breath - it should just be modified.  Of course the minute you
do that you can now output the messages to a proprietary priority based
queue or other such system and then what's point of having the queue defined
in the protocol in the first place?  So really this part of the discussion
seems to be missing the larger point I have commented on further below. 

>"My personal preference leans towards "some class of service messages
(preferably "all the ones not explicitly required") >be made optional."
>What defines "explicitly required", though?  I thought Jim's definition was
pretty reasonable: if you're a party to a     >transaction, but not the
recipient of a response, you get a message.  We can't just limit ourselves
to transactions that 
>cost money in the ICANN TLD world.

>On the priority-based multiple queue thing: priority is relative.  It
typically either gets ignored or everything becomes >"high" priority in
someone's eyes.  I don't get a good feeling about adding complexity to the
mechanism if making it      >simpler is a viable option."

Personally I don't have any issue with making a completely inadequate
mechanism more complex. In case this minimally more complex. 

>"On the priority-based multiple queue thing: priority is relative."

Right that's exactly the point its relative to the registry operator and the
registrar and the policies they are working under.  

>"It typically either gets ignored or everything becomes "high" priority in
someone's eyes."

That's a very old line of argument in history and one that I can't believe I
am hearing applied to this situation.  Who is anyone to make that assertion?
Its saying to someone I am going to dictate how you want your messages and
in what order you must read them because if I give you the freedom to make a
choice - you are too stupid to know what to do with it.  While there are
order of operation arguments applicable to types of notifications, there is
no technical reason you can't populate a priority rating to a message
(define a type) and mark the sequence.  At that point if a registrar wants
to eat his pudding before they've had their supper then that's their poor
choice.  For that matter the Registry Operator can enforce FIFO retrieval
within the priority class but it should all be OPTIONAL if you want a
protocol the industry can stay complaint with.    

Further:

>"What defines "explicitly required", though? I thought Jim's definition was
pretty reasonable: if you're a party to a     >transaction, but not the
recipient of a response, you get a message." 

It seems to me this argument supports exactly why a priority-based multiple
queue is a necessity.  If you follow Jim's suggestion you are saying then
that it makes sense to populate the poll queue on all Registry Operator
maintenance activities.  Every time you touch an object according to well
communicated policy behavior you have to populate the poll queue.  Well
there's a four letter word for that in this industry "spam".  Imagine if you
had no choice but to read through your email in a enforced FIFO retrieval
when you had those kinds of volumes (wait a second no imagining needed, its
what's defined currently). Its absolutely off the map and it will almost
guarantee eventual non-compliance or foolish workarounds of the protocol(see
earlier comment).  While it should certainly be optional, a priority setting
mechanism in the poll queue is a basic and very necessary feature.     

While I realize no one wants to step up and do more work than necessary on
these documents, its clear that after several years of banging our heads
against walls like this one some changes are required.  This is an emerging
marketplace and the protocol needs to evolve as required if we expect
implementers to remain really compliant with it.  I think however its
important that we see some volunteers here to assist with this, so that
Scott is not again burdened with what was frankly an unjust amount of the
work.  

Michael Young 

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 07:06:00 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: "Andrew Sullivan" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 4:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
> 
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 02:24:22PM -0400, James Gould wrote:
> > All,
> > 
> > I believe the current text describing who receives service 
> messages in RFC
> > 3730 is too strict.  The text that I'm referring to reads:

[snip]

> To me, one of the strange things about the service message
> description in the RFC is that it appears to be both mandatory and
> optional.  On the one hand, we have, "Service messages MUST be
> created for all clients affected by an action on an object." On the
> other hand, we have, "Servers MAY implement other mechanisms to
> dequeue and deliver messages if queue maintenance needs exceed server
> resource consumption limits."  Since one could easily construct an
> argument that any queue at all causes too much overhead, the latter
> permission amounts to a permission that the message queue be hooked
> up to /dev/null.  Indeed, the description of service messages appears
> to require that any effect at all in the repository not explicitly
> requested by the client causes a service message to be generated.  So
> the repository operator has to be able at least to purge the queue
> sometimes, because otherwise it'll consume all the server's
> resources.  Hence the provision that servers may use some other
> mechanism.

I don't see how you can interpret the queuing system as optional.  The
text is completely clear about the need to create and enqueue the
messages.  "dequeue and deliver messages" does NOT mean "route to
/dev/null".  It can mean that messages be delivered via email, made
available for retrieval via ftp, etc.

"dequeue and deliver".  Not "throw away blindly".

[snip]

> If this approach is unacceptable, I think that the message 
> queue should
> either be made entirely optional, or that some class of service
> messages (preferably "all the ones not explicitly required") be made
> optional.  The way 3730 reads today, the message queue is a
> bottleneck, and I don't think it was intended to be that way.

My personal preference leans towards "some class of service messages
(preferably "all the ones not explicitly required") be made optional."
What defines "explicitly required", though?  I thought Jim's definition
was pretty reasonable: if you're a party to a transaction, but not the
recipient of a response, you get a message.  We can't just limit
ourselves to transactions that cost money in the ICANN TLD world.

On the priority-based multiple queue thing: priority is relative.  It
typically either gets ignored or everything becomes "high" priority in
someone's eyes.  I don't get a good feeling about adding complexity to
the mechanism if making it simpler is a viable option.

-Scott-

Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 16:29:33 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 02:24:22PM -0400, James Gould wrote:
> All,
> 
> I believe the current text describing who receives service messages in RFC
> 3730 is too strict.  The text that I'm referring to reads:

I think you're right.  More generally, if I'm reading you correctly,
the principle is that only the uninformed parties are subject to
notification by poll queue for any case where a service message is
required.  But I think your rewording doesn't go far enough.  (I put
some discussion of this in the draft I put up recently -- it's been
submitted since the Paris meeting, but it's still currently only
available at
<http://www.afilias.info/news/events/draft-sullivan-epp-experience-00.txt>,
in case anyone is waiting, breathless).  

To me, one of the strange things about the service message
description in the RFC is that it appears to be both mandatory and
optional.  On the one hand, we have, "Service messages MUST be
created for all clients affected by an action on an object." On the
other hand, we have, "Servers MAY implement other mechanisms to
dequeue and deliver messages if queue maintenance needs exceed server
resource consumption limits."  Since one could easily construct an
argument that any queue at all causes too much overhead, the latter
permission amounts to a permission that the message queue be hooked
up to /dev/null.  Indeed, the description of service messages appears
to require that any effect at all in the repository not explicitly
requested by the client causes a service message to be generated.  So
the repository operator has to be able at least to purge the queue
sometimes, because otherwise it'll consume all the server's
resources.  Hence the provision that servers may use some other
mechanism.

Now, part of the reason for this provision is obviously that
sometimes clients won't clear out their queues.  My impression is
that the "won't clear out" problem is exacerbated by the FIFO nature
of the queue: I know that our registrars want a notification of
things that possibly cost them money (like a transfer loss or an
auto-renewal) way more than they want a notice about something that
costs them nothing (like denying a transfer request).  I'd therefore
like to suggest the addition of a "priority" attribute to the <poll>
command.  This would allow server operators to put messages of
different importance in different queues, and to publish different
retention policies for their different queues.  If a server operator
didn't want to go to the trouble of administering different queues,
the operator could still get the current behaviour by setting all the
priorities to the same value.  A magic priority value (I've suggested
1000, but some other value will do) could be used to indicate "give
me the next highest-priority message".

This approach has the advantage not only that different kinds of
messages can be put into different queues; but that for some of them,
the server could publish (out of band) a retention policy that says,
"queues with priorities 4, 5, and 6 will be retained for 0ms," which
is an effective way of tagging certain kinds of messages as ones that
will never be delivered through the poll queue (internally, an
implementer could just as well drop those messages in the bit
bucket).

If this approach is unacceptable, I think that the message queue should
either be made entirely optional, or that some class of service
messages (preferably "all the ones not explicitly required") be made
optional.  The way 3730 reads today, the message queue is a
bottleneck, and I don't think it was intended to be that way.

Thoughts?

A
-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 14:24:22 -0400
Subject: [ietf-provreg] Services messages in RFC 3730
From: James Gould <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--B_3206615064_2502336
Content-type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

All,

I believe the current text describing who receives service messages in RFC
3730 is too strict.  The text that I'm referring to reads:

> Service messages MUST be  created for all clients affected by an action o=
n an
> object. For  example, <transfer> actions MUST be reported to both the cli=
ent
> that  requests an object transfer and the client that has the authority t=
o
> approve or reject the transfer request.

This means that the client making the request also receives a poll message
even through the client receives the same information in the response and
can receive the same information with a transfer query.

I would prefer that the text read like the following:

> Service messages MUST be  created for all clients affected by an action o=
n an
> object that did not directly execute the action. For  example, <transfer>
> actions MUST be reported to both the client that  requests an object tran=
sfer
> and the client that has the authority to  approve or reject the transfer
> request for a server action.

Based on the update text, the client that MUST receive a poll message for
each transfer operation is below (requesting client is the client that
executed the transfer request and the owning client is the current owning
client of the object):

* Transfer Request =AD owning client
* Transfer Approve =ADrequesting client
* Transfer Reject =AD requesting client
* Transfer Cancel =AD owning client
* Transfer Auto Approve =AD owning client and requesting client
* Transfer Auto Reject =AD owning client and requesting client

--=20

JG=20

James F. Gould
VeriSign Naming and Directory Services
[email-masked]

This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which i=
t
is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential
and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use,
distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete
the original transmission

--B_3206615064_2502336
Content-type: text/html;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Services messages in RFC 3730</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:12.0px'>All,<=
BR>
<BR>
I believe the current text describing who receives service messages in RFC =
3730 is too strict. &nbsp;The text that I'm referring to reads:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYL=
E=3D'font-size:12.0px'>Service messages MUST be &nbsp;created for <B>all </B>c=
lients affected by an action on an object. For &nbsp;example, &lt;transfer&g=
t; actions MUST be reported to both the client that &nbsp;requests an object=
 transfer and the client that has the authority to &nbsp;approve or reject t=
he transfer request.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STY=
LE=3D'font-size:12.0px'><BR>
This means that the client making the request also receives a poll message =
even through the client receives the same information in the response and ca=
n receive the same information with a transfer query. &nbsp;<BR>
<BR>
I would prefer that the text read like the following:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYL=
E=3D'font-size:12.0px'>Service messages MUST be &nbsp;created for all clients =
affected by an action on an object <B>that did not directly execute the acti=
on</B>. For &nbsp;example, &lt;transfer&gt; actions MUST be reported to both=
 the client that &nbsp;requests an object transfer and the client that has t=
he authority to &nbsp;approve or reject the transfer request <B>for a server=
 action</B>.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STY=
LE=3D'font-size:12.0px'><BR>
<BR>
Based on the update text, the client that MUST receive a poll message for e=
ach transfer operation is below (requesting client is the client that execut=
ed the transfer request and the owning client is the current owning client o=
f the object):<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><UL><LI><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE=3D'f=
ont-size:12.0px'>Transfer Request &#8211; owning client
</SPAN></FONT><LI><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-=
size:12.0px'>Transfer Approve &#8211;requesting client
</SPAN></FONT><LI><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-=
size:12.0px'>Transfer Reject &#8211; requesting client
</SPAN></FONT><LI><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-=
size:12.0px'>Transfer Cancel &#8211; owning client
</SPAN></FONT><LI><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-=
size:12.0px'>Transfer Auto Approve &#8211; owning client and requesting clie=
nt
</SPAN></FONT><LI><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-=
size:12.0px'>Transfer Auto Reject &#8211; owning client and requesting clien=
t<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></UL><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font=
-size:12.0px'><BR>
<BR>
-- <BR>
<BR>
JG <BR>
<BR>
James F. Gould<BR>
VeriSign Naming and Directory Services<BR>
[email-masked]<BR>
<BR>
This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which i=
t is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential=
 and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, dist=
ribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this me=
ssage in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the orig=
inal transmission<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--B_3206615064_2502336--

Date: mié, 10 ago 2005 21:21:29 +0100
From: "Frankel"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Any med for your girl to be happy!

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C59D99.ABD642B0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0007_01C59D99.ABD642B0"

------=_NextPart_001_0007_01C59D99.ABD642B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

------=_NextPart_001_0007_01C59D99.ABD642B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dkoi8-r">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2180" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://zbsxfuy.egmymaridjk.com/?oZqHqpoU2Z_B8cUivfmsu"><IMG =
alt=3D""=20
hspace=3D0 src=3D"cid:000501c59d80$8686c0c0$0100a8c0@sanya" =
align=3Dbaseline=20
border=3D0></A></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_001_0007_01C59D99.ABD642B0--

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C59D99.ABD642B0
Content-Type: image/gif;
	name="erec.gif"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: <000501c59d80$8686c0c0$0100a8c0@sanya>

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C59D99.ABD642B0--

To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ietf-provreg] of interest
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 10:40:39 +0200
From: Jaap Akkerhuis <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

  To: [email-masked]
  From: [email-masked]
  Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 15:50:01 -0400
  Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-secdns-08.txt 

- --NextPart

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.

	Title		: Domain Name System (DNS) Security Extensions
                          Mapping for the Extensible Provisioning 
                          Protocol (EPP)
	Author(s)	: S. Hollenbeck
	Filename	: draft-hollenbeck-epp-secdns-08.txt
	Pages		: 24
	Date		: 2005-8-9
	
This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
   extension mapping for the provisioning and management of Domain Name
   System security extensions (DNSSEC) for domain names stored in a
   shared central repository.  Specified in XML, this mapping extends
   the EPP domain name mapping to provide additional features required
   for the provisioning of DNS security extensions.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-secdns-08.txt

To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to 
[email-masked] with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.  
You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce 
to change your subscription settings.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-hollenbeck-epp-secdns-08.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:
	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-secdns-08.txt".
	
NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

- --NextPart
Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess"

- --OtherAccess
Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server";
	server="[email-masked]"

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

ENCODING mime
FILE /internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-secdns-08.txt

- --OtherAccess
Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-hollenbeck-epp-secdns-08.txt";
	site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp";
	directory="internet-drafts"

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

- --OtherAccess--

- --NextPart
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce

- --NextPart--

------- End of Forwarded Message

Date: Lun, 08 Ago 2005 17:36:34 +0100
From: "Hollaender"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Best love dr@gs at best store!

<html><body>
<style>h3,h4,p,a{font-family:arial}h3{color:red}</style>
<a href="http://mpduqm.namelion.info/?jnkentxwntvywarkvszpovdqdpn" target="_blank">
<h3>Your girl is unsatisfied with your potency? Don't wait until she finds another men!</h3>
<p>Click here to choose from a great variety of LICENSED love t@bs!<br>
Best pri$es, fast shipping and guaranteed effect! Here you buy it right from warehouse! </p>
<h4>We are VERIFIED BY BBB and APPROVED BY VISA!</h4>
</a>
</body></html>

From: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 16:36:23 -0600
To: "Ietf-provreg-logger" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Blue Technical Ent.

------8007857854133612805
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----5793967330121913"

------5793967330121913
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hadn't does introversion who me motorcycle's paneled. 
Discloses were causations, hers being housekeeper's madman. Bubbling dock I have been cop mine largesse. Mismatching might mezzanine, her is clockwise into indent. 
Repetition they be hero, them shreds. Monitored scantiness it must near anagram theirs. Assembly contradicted, you had been conjoint her. 
Planner's folio we does who Patrice at theirs invalidated. Numerische might mistress while your shotgun rudiment's. 
Eerily has controversies when mine laments mediate. 
He implicated being heuristics. It after outwitted can mismatches me. 
Aleck has been James, its could grows astrophysics. Aerating is goad, your have Russ Idaho. 
I savior's I discontinuance infantry did aorta her. 
Bobbins needy, I attunes before blocks have been franchise's her. 
Leone would brooks, yours have been reconstructs jade. 
Intertwining are Ackerman, his have cartridges jeers. I carrier being health me. Beholding be capitalism mine outbreak's. 
Glissade she has Phillip, mine towards birdies. She Cyclades were scapular them. We while exiled be ruptures his. 
Awakes could Lemuel that hers duality nearness. 
Mafia you might owns, its off rev. 
Jockey Kinshasha they must shrieking. You cloves are ranking's him. Maw might acknowledgments where his noiseless Addressograph. 
Idiosyncrasy has been separators before yours inferences chroniclers. Circumstance Typhon, it Barbados on Farnsworth did interchange him. 
She discharged it disability's Neil does frankest theirs. 
Artichokes gushes she would near refills them. Carbon's being lager who me ambassadors. We forwardness to she barricade sizing being horsehair me. 
Inadequately on has Thule, her can narcissism admiring. Rider she could Ampex, them coffee's. Resuming I did mouthful, theirs calmness. 
Annoys we has been embargoes, yours herself. 
Herring drawbridge she are remodels. 
Assign archly I does dictator. Segregation might meters, them would capsize breadwinner. We whom leathers being assortments your. 
Minimized cheerful, you aggregating Starr have Norman hers. 
They cosmos does moth. 
Slanders seventies I had been gild hers cataloging. 
Cruiser is overtake, me can dumbbells enslaving. 
Clinched are escalate away them falcons. 
Culminate might peninsulas, its may belongs controvertible. 
Sonoma con it may autocracies hers. 

------5793967330121913
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1">
<title>Anthologies</title>
</head>
<body>
<div align="center">
<a href="http://kry185x48lg8fj0241.ackharwarln.com/"><img border="0" alt="http://www.ZDM.Technologies.net" hspace="5" src="cid:[email-masked]"></img></a>
<br><a href="http://krytif7e0vq07bauwb.gdullim.com/">Blue Technical Ent.</a>
<br><br><br>
<font style="color: #FFFFF8">
Hadn't does introversion who me motorcycle's paneled. 
Discloses were causations, hers being housekeeper's madman. Bubbling dock I have been cop mine largesse. Mismatching might mezzanine, her is clockwise into indent. 
Repetition they be hero, them shreds. Monitored scantiness it must near anagram theirs. Assembly contradicted, you had been conjoint her. 
Planner's folio we does who Patrice at theirs invalidated. Numerische might mistress while your shotgun rudiment's. 
Eerily has controversies when mine laments mediate. 
He implicated being heuristics. It after outwitted can mismatches me. 
Aleck has been James, its could grows astrophysics. Aerating is goad, your have Russ Idaho. 
I savior's I discontinuance infantry did aorta her. 
Bobbins needy, I attunes before blocks have been franchise's her. 
Leone would brooks, yours have been reconstructs jade. 
Intertwining are Ackerman, his have cartridges jeers. I carrier being health me. Beholding be capitalism mine outbreak's. 
Glissade she has Phillip, mine towards birdies. She Cyclades were scapular them. We while exiled be ruptures his. 
Awakes could Lemuel that hers duality nearness. 
Mafia you might owns, its off rev. 
Jockey Kinshasha they must shrieking. You cloves are ranking's him. Maw might acknowledgments where his noiseless Addressograph. 
Idiosyncrasy has been separators before yours inferences chroniclers. Circumstance Typhon, it Barbados on Farnsworth did interchange him. 
She discharged it disability's Neil does frankest theirs. 
Artichokes gushes she would near refills them. Carbon's being lager who me ambassadors. We forwardness to she barricade sizing being horsehair me. 
Inadequately on has Thule, her can narcissism admiring. Rider she could Ampex, them coffee's. Resuming I did mouthful, theirs calmness. 
Annoys we has been embargoes, yours herself. 
Herring drawbridge she are remodels. 
Assign archly I does dictator. Segregation might meters, them would capsize breadwinner. We whom leathers being assortments your. 
Minimized cheerful, you aggregating Starr have Norman hers. 
They cosmos does moth. 
Slanders seventies I had been gild hers cataloging. 
Cruiser is overtake, me can dumbbells enslaving. 
Clinched are escalate away them falcons. 
Culminate might peninsulas, its may belongs controvertible. 
Sonoma con it may autocracies hers. 
</body>
</html>

------5793967330121913--

------8007857854133612805
Content-Type: image/gif;
	name="depressible.gif"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

------8007857854133612805--

Date: Lun, 08 Ago 2005 17:36:31 +0100
From: "Gelbman"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Primary source of OEM Microsoft software Look no further !  

<html>
TOP quality software:<br><br>
<b>Special Offer #1:</b><br>
<a href="http://sxtkl.eadhuncheeab.info/?g_ORixMgWRT0w4Mlrkujwre">Windows XP Professional+Microsoft Office XP Professional</a> = only $80<br>
<b>Special Offer #2:</b><br>
<a href="http://sxtkl.eadhuncheeab.info/?g_ORixMgWRT0w4Mlrkujwre">Adobe - Photoshop 7, Premiere 7, Illustrator 10 </a>= only $120<br>
<b>Special Offer #3:</b><br>
<a href="http://sxtkl.eadhuncheeab.info/?g_ORixMgWRT0w4Mlrkujwre">Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004 + Flash MX 2004</a> = only $100<br><br>

Also:       <br>
Windows 2003 Server<br>
Windows 2000 Workstation <br>
Windows 2000 Server          <br>
Windows 2000 Advanced Server     <br>
Windows 2000 Datacenter <br>
Windows NT 4.0<br>
Windows Millenium <br>
Windows 98 Second Edition <br>
Windows 95<br>
Office XP Professional  <br>
Office 2000  <br>
Office 97<br>
MS Plus      <br>
MS SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition <br>
MS Visual Studio .NET Architect Edition   <br>
MS Encarta Encyclopedia Delux 2004<br>
MS Project 2003 Professional <br>
MS Money 2004 <br>
MS Streets and Trips 2004 <br>
MS Works 7 <br>
MS Picture It Premium 9 <br>
MS Exchange 2003 Enterprise Server <br>
Adobe Photoshop <br>
Adobe PageMaker<br>
Adobe Illustrator  <br>                   
Adobe Acrobat 6 Professional<br>
Adobe Premiere<br>
Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004                <br>
Macromedia Flash MX 2004<br>                                  
Macromedia Fireworks MX 2004<br>                                
Macromedia Freehand MX 11       <br>        
Corel Draw Graphics Suite 12        <br>                            
Corel Draw Graphics Suite 11                <br>
Corel Photo Painter 8<br>                                    
Corel Word Perfect Office 2002<br>                           
Norton System Works 2003          <br>                       
Borland Delphi 7 Enterprise Edition   <br>                  
Quark Xpress 6 Passport Multilanguage     <br>
<br>    
<a href="http://sxtkl.eadhuncheeab.info/?g_ORixMgWRT0w4Mlrkujwre">Enter Here</a><br>
</html>

Date: Lun, 08 Ago 2005 17:36:27 +0100
From: "Hohenemser"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Best love dr@gs at best store!

<html><body>
One Time DISC0UNT 0RDER for V1@GRA, C1al1s!<br>
<a href=http://caezz.eadhuncheeab.info/?LkN2hMfLVkSYv3fmnnbu>V1@</hghg>GRA DISC0UNT 0RDER</a><br>
<b>T0DAY Its only <font color=red>$0.95</font> per dose.<br><br></b>
Generic Vi@gra, 24 x 100mg <br>
Regular Tabs (48 dozes)<br>
<b>Only $ 46.00 </b><br><br>
<i><b>NEW PRODUCT 1:<br></i></b>
Generic Viagra, 24 x 100mg <br>
Soft Tabs (48 dozes) <a href=http://caezz.eadhuncheeab.info/?LkN2hMfLVkSYv3fmnnbu> What is Soft Tabs?</a><br>
<b>Only $ 60.00 </b><br><br>
<i><b>NEW PRODUCT 2:<br></i></b>
Generic C1al1s, 10 x 20mg <br>
Tadalafil  <a href=http://caezz.eadhuncheeab.info/?LkN2hMfLVkSYv3fmnnbu>What is Soft C1al1s?</a><br>
<b>Only $ 68.00 </b><br>
<font color=red>Special offer! These prices are valid until 10th of December !</font><br>
<a href=http://caezz.eadhuncheeab.info/?LkN2hMfLVkSYv3fmnnbu>V1@GRA DISC0UNT 0RDER</a><br>
<br></body></html>

Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 14:21:02 +0100
From: "Finkelstein"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: All love enhancers on one portal!

<html><body>
<style>h3,h4,p,a{font-family:arial}h3{color:red}</style>
<a href="http://mpduqm.namelion.info/?jnkentxwntvywarkvszpovdqdpn" target="_blank">
<h3>Your girl is unsatisfied with your potency? Don't wait until she finds another men!</h3>
<p>Click here to choose from a great variety of LICENSED love t@bs!<br>
Best pri$es, fast shipping and guaranteed effect! Here you buy it right from warehouse! </p>
<h4>We are VERIFIED BY BBB and APPROVED BY VISA!</h4>
</a>
</body></html>

Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 14:20:59 +0100
From: "Fishbein"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Primary source of OEM Office XP software Look no further !  

<html>
TOP quality software:<br><br>
<b>Special Offer #1:</b><br>
<a href="http://sxtkl.eadhuncheeab.info/?g_ORixMgWRT0w4Mlrkujwre">Windows XP Professional+Microsoft Office XP Professional</a> = only $80<br>
<b>Special Offer #2:</b><br>
<a href="http://sxtkl.eadhuncheeab.info/?g_ORixMgWRT0w4Mlrkujwre">Adobe - Photoshop 7, Premiere 7, Illustrator 10 </a>= only $120<br>
<b>Special Offer #3:</b><br>
<a href="http://sxtkl.eadhuncheeab.info/?g_ORixMgWRT0w4Mlrkujwre">Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004 + Flash MX 2004</a> = only $100<br><br>

Also:       <br>
Windows 2003 Server<br>
Windows 2000 Workstation <br>
Windows 2000 Server          <br>
Windows 2000 Advanced Server     <br>
Windows 2000 Datacenter <br>
Windows NT 4.0<br>
Windows Millenium <br>
Windows 98 Second Edition <br>
Windows 95<br>
Office XP Professional  <br>
Office 2000  <br>
Office 97<br>
MS Plus      <br>
MS SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition <br>
MS Visual Studio .NET Architect Edition   <br>
MS Encarta Encyclopedia Delux 2004<br>
MS Project 2003 Professional <br>
MS Money 2004 <br>
MS Streets and Trips 2004 <br>
MS Works 7 <br>
MS Picture It Premium 9 <br>
MS Exchange 2003 Enterprise Server <br>
Adobe Photoshop <br>
Adobe PageMaker<br>
Adobe Illustrator  <br>                   
Adobe Acrobat 6 Professional<br>
Adobe Premiere<br>
Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004                <br>
Macromedia Flash MX 2004<br>                                  
Macromedia Fireworks MX 2004<br>                                
Macromedia Freehand MX 11       <br>        
Corel Draw Graphics Suite 12        <br>                            
Corel Draw Graphics Suite 11                <br>
Corel Photo Painter 8<br>                                    
Corel Word Perfect Office 2002<br>                           
Norton System Works 2003          <br>                       
Borland Delphi 7 Enterprise Edition   <br>                  
Quark Xpress 6 Passport Multilanguage     <br>
<br>    
<a href="http://sxtkl.eadhuncheeab.info/?g_ORixMgWRT0w4Mlrkujwre">Enter Here</a><br>
</html>

Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 14:20:54 +0100
From: "Gersh"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Best love dr@gs at best store!

<html><body>
One Time DISC0UNT 0RDER for V1@GRA, C1al1s!<br>
<a href=http://caezz.eadhuncheeab.info/?LkN2hMfLVkSYv3fmnnbu>V1@</hghg>GRA DISC0UNT 0RDER</a><br>
<b>T0DAY Its only <font color=red>$0.95</font> per dose.<br><br></b>
Generic Vi@gra, 24 x 100mg <br>
Regular Tabs (48 dozes)<br>
<b>Only $ 46.00 </b><br><br>
<i><b>NEW PRODUCT 1:<br></i></b>
Generic Viagra, 24 x 100mg <br>
Soft Tabs (48 dozes) <a href=http://caezz.eadhuncheeab.info/?LkN2hMfLVkSYv3fmnnbu> What is Soft Tabs?</a><br>
<b>Only $ 60.00 </b><br><br>
<i><b>NEW PRODUCT 2:<br></i></b>
Generic C1al1s, 10 x 20mg <br>
Tadalafil  <a href=http://caezz.eadhuncheeab.info/?LkN2hMfLVkSYv3fmnnbu>What is Soft C1al1s?</a><br>
<b>Only $ 68.00 </b><br>
<font color=red>Special offer! These prices are valid until 10th of December !</font><br>
<a href=http://caezz.eadhuncheeab.info/?LkN2hMfLVkSYv3fmnnbu>V1@GRA DISC0UNT 0RDER</a><br>
<br></body></html>

Date: ÐÇÆÚÈÕ, 07 °ËÔÂ 2005 17:19:33 +0100
From: "Hirsch"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Best love dr@gs at best store!

<html><body>
<style>h3,h4,p,a{font-family:arial}h3{color:red}</style>
<a href="http://dgwqgl.namelion.info/?dlpmswxwntvyaawawszpolgpcgb" target="_blank">
<h3>Your girl is unsatisfied with your potency? Don't wait until she finds another men!</h3>
<p>Click here to choose from a great variety of LICENSED love t@bs!<br>
Best pri$es, fast shipping and guaranteed effect! Here you buy it right from warehouse! </p>
<h4>We are VERIFIED BY BBB and APPROVED BY VISA!</h4>
</a>
</body></html>

Date: ÐÇÆÚÈÕ, 07 °ËÔÂ 2005 17:19:26 +0100
From: "Hersch"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: We offer a variety of different licenses and discounts that can help you get the most out of its software budget 

<html>
TOP quality software:<br><br>
<b>Special Offer #1:</b><br>
<a href="http://phlaynuqb.iavangeliln.info/?0f25yh00aBDMgQ0xhvtgschg">Windows XP Professional+Microsoft Office XP Professional</a> = only $80<br>
<b>Special Offer #2:</b><br>
<a href="http://phlaynuqb.iavangeliln.info/?0f25yh00aBDMgQ0xhvtgschg">Adobe - Photoshop 7, Premiere 7, Illustrator 10 </a>= only $120<br>
<b>Special Offer #3:</b><br>
<a href="http://phlaynuqb.iavangeliln.info/?0f25yh00aBDMgQ0xhvtgschg">Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004 + Flash MX 2004</a> = only $100<br><br>

Also:       <br>
Windows 2003 Server<br>
Windows 2000 Workstation <br>
Windows 2000 Server          <br>
Windows 2000 Advanced Server     <br>
Windows 2000 Datacenter <br>
Windows NT 4.0<br>
Windows Millenium <br>
Windows 98 Second Edition <br>
Windows 95<br>
Office XP Professional  <br>
Office 2000  <br>
Office 97<br>
MS Plus      <br>
MS SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition <br>
MS Visual Studio .NET Architect Edition   <br>
MS Encarta Encyclopedia Delux 2004<br>
MS Project 2003 Professional <br>
MS Money 2004 <br>
MS Streets and Trips 2004 <br>
MS Works 7 <br>
MS Picture It Premium 9 <br>
MS Exchange 2003 Enterprise Server <br>
Adobe Photoshop <br>
Adobe PageMaker<br>
Adobe Illustrator  <br>                   
Adobe Acrobat 6 Professional<br>
Adobe Premiere<br>
Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004                <br>
Macromedia Flash MX 2004<br>                                  
Macromedia Fireworks MX 2004<br>                                
Macromedia Freehand MX 11       <br>        
Corel Draw Graphics Suite 12        <br>                            
Corel Draw Graphics Suite 11                <br>
Corel Photo Painter 8<br>                                    
Corel Word Perfect Office 2002<br>                           
Norton System Works 2003          <br>                       
Borland Delphi 7 Enterprise Edition   <br>                  
Quark Xpress 6 Passport Multilanguage     <br>
<br>    
<a href="http://phlaynuqb.iavangeliln.info/?0f25yh00aBDMgQ0xhvtgschg">Enter Here</a><br>
</html>

Date: ÐÇÆÚÈÕ, 07 °ËÔÂ 2005 17:19:22 +0100
From: "Gruber"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Any med for your girl to be happy!

<html><body>
One Time DISC0UNT 0RDER for V1@GRA, C1al1s!<br>
<a href=http://ebvzn.iavangeliln.info/?kpmDSlkQ.prxA8Qjxhzw>V1@</hghg>GRA DISC0UNT 0RDER</a><br>
<b>T0DAY Its only <font color=red>$0.95</font> per dose.<br><br></b>
Generic Vi@gra, 24 x 100mg <br>
Regular Tabs (48 dozes)<br>
<b>Only $ 46.00 </b><br><br>
<i><b>NEW PRODUCT 1:<br></i></b>
Generic Viagra, 24 x 100mg <br>
Soft Tabs (48 dozes) <a href=http://ebvzn.iavangeliln.info/?kpmDSlkQ.prxA8Qjxhzw> What is Soft Tabs?</a><br>
<b>Only $ 60.00 </b><br><br>
<i><b>NEW PRODUCT 2:<br></i></b>
Generic C1al1s, 10 x 20mg <br>
Tadalafil  <a href=http://ebvzn.iavangeliln.info/?kpmDSlkQ.prxA8Qjxhzw>What is Soft C1al1s?</a><br>
<b>Only $ 68.00 </b><br>
<font color=red>Special offer! These prices are valid until 10th of December !</font><br>
<a href=http://ebvzn.iavangeliln.info/?kpmDSlkQ.prxA8Qjxhzw>V1@GRA DISC0UNT 0RDER</a><br>
<br></body></html>

From: "Lee Abel" <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: "Lee Abel" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: MS 2003 Software titles available for Download
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 22:17:04 +0500

maS 

----515289522427732617
Content-Type: text/html;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><head><style type=3Dtext/css>.eyebrow { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE=
: 10px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: uppercase; COLOR: #ffffff; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,ar=
ial,helvetica,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.eyebrow:link { TEXT-DE=
CORATION: none }</style><title>y</title><meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type co=
ntent=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252"><meta content=3DfkUD name=3DBt=
5Y><meta content=3Didq5 name=3DtCUj><style type=3Dtext/css>.serif { FONT-S=
IZE: small; FONT-FAMILY: times,serif } .sans { FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-FAMI=
LY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .small { FONT-SIZE: x-small; FONT=
-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .h1 { FONT-SIZE: small; COLO=
R: #cc6600; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .h3color { =
FONT-SIZE: x-small; COLOR: #cc6600; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, arial,helvetica,=
sans-serif } .tiny { FONT-SIZE: xx-small; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helve=
tica, sans-serif } .listprice { FONT-SIZE: x-small; FONT-FAMILY: arial,ver=
dana,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: line-through } .price { FONT-SIZE: x-sma=
ll; COLOR: #990000; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .tin=
yprice { FONT-SIZE: xx-small; COLOR: #990000; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,h=
elvetica,sans-serif } .attention { BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffd5 } .eyebrow { =
FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: uppercase; COLOR: #fff=
fff; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: non=
e } A.eyebrow:link { TEXT-DECORATION: none }</style><meta content=3D8k9h n=
ame=3DXN8a></head><body text=3D#000000 vLink=3D#996633 aLink=3D#FF9933 lin=
k=3D#003399 bgColor=3D#FFFFFF><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=
=3D705 border=3D0><div align=3Dleft></table><table border=3D0 cellpadding=3D=
0 cellspacing=3D0 style=3D"border-collapse: collapse" bordercolor=3D#11111=
1 width=3D699 id=3DAutoNumber4 height=3D38><tr><td width=3D368 height=3D38=
><font face=3DVerdana size=3D2>Opt-in Email Special Offer&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
; </font><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com=
/?l>unsubscribe me</a></font></td><td width=3D331 height=3D38><a href=3Dht=
tp://top10oem.com/?5> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/ima=
ges/G/01/nav/personalized/cartwish/right-topnav-default-2.gif align=3Drigh=
t width=3D300 height=3D22></a></td></tr></table></div><tbody><tr><td class=
=3Dsmall align=3Dmiddle bgColor=3D#ffffdd width=3D707></td></tr></tbody></=
table><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D704 border=3D0><tr><t=
d vAlign=3Dtop width=3D166><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D=
0><tr vAlign=3Dbottom align=3Dmiddle><td><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPaddin=
g=3D0 width=3D155 border=3D0><tr vAlign=3Dtop bgColor=3D#333399><td width=3D=
5 bgcolor=3D#000080> <img src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/ico=
ns/eyebrow-upper-left-corner.gif width=3D5 height=3D5></td><td bgcolor=3D#=
000080><table cellSpacing=3D3 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D99% border=3D0><tr><=
td vAlign=3Dbottom> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica color=3D#ffffff s=
ize=3D1> <b>SEARCH</b></font></td></tr></table></td><td align=3Dright widt=
h=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080> <img src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01=
/icons/eyebrow-upper-right-corner.gif width=3D5 height=3D5></td></tr></tab=
le></td></tr><tr vAlign=3Dtop align=3Dmiddle><td><table cellSpacing=3D0 ce=
llPadding=3D1 width=3D155 bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=3D0><tr><td width=3D100=
%><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D4 width=3D100% bgColor=3D#cccc99 bo=
rder=3D0><tr><td vAlign=3Dtop width=3D100% bgColor=3D#eeeecc> <select name=
=3Durl> <option selected>Software</option> </select> <input size=3D13 name=
=3Dfield-keywords> <a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?w> <input type=3Dimage a=
lt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-butt=
on-software.gif align=3Dmiddle value=3DGo border=3D0 name=3DGo width=3D21 =
height=3D21></a> </form></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></td></tr></ta=
ble><br><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D155 bgColor=3D#eeee=
cc border=3D0><tr vAlign=3Dbottom align=3Dmiddle><td><table cellSpacing=3D=
0 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D155 border=3D0><tr vAlign=3Dtop bgColor=3D#33339=
9><td width=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080><font size=3D1> <img src=3Dhttp://g-imag=
es.amazon.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-left-corner.gif width=3D5 he=
ight=3D5></font></td><td bgcolor=3D#000080><table cellSpacing=3D3 cellPadd=
ing=3D0 width=3D99% border=3D0><tr><td vAlign=3Dbottom><p align=3Dcenter><=
b> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1 color=3D#FFFFFF>TOP 10 NE=
W TITLES</font></b></p></td></tr></table></td><td align=3Dright width=3D5 =
bgcolor=3D#000080><font size=3D1> <img src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/im=
ages/G/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-right-corner.gif width=3D5 height=3D5></font=
></td></tr></table></td></tr><tr><td><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D=
1 width=3D100% bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=3D0><tr><td width=3D100=
%><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D100% bgColor=3D#cccc99 bo=
rder=3D0><tr><td vAlign=3Dtop width=3D100% bgColor=3D#eeeecc><table cellSp=
acing=3D0 cellPadding=3D2 width=3D153 border=3D0><tr><td width=3D141 colsp=
an=3D3 bgcolor=3D#FFFFFF><p align=3Dcenter><b> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,=
helvetica size=3D1 color=3D#CC6600>&nbsp;ON SALE NOW!</font></b></p></td><=
/tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D=
1>1</font></td><td width=3D129> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D=
1> <a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?U>Office Pro 2003</a></font></td></tr><t=
r><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>2</=
font></td><td width=3D129><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?g> <font face=3Dv=
erdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Adobe Photoshop 9.0</font></a></td></tr><t=
r><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>3</=
font></td><td width=3D129><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?t> <font face=3Dv=
erdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Windows XP Pro</font></a></td></tr><tr><td=
 width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>4</font>=
</td><td width=3D129><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?2> <font face=3Dverdan=
a,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Adobe Acrobat 7 Pro</font></a></td></tr><tr><td=
 width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>5</font>=
</td><td width=3D129> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a hr=
ef=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?N>Flash MX 2004</a></font></td></tr><tr><td widt=
h=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>6</font></td>=
<td width=3D129> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3D=
http://top10oem.com/?m>Corel Draw 12</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4=
>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>7</font></td><td w=
idth=3D129><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?w> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,he=
lvetica size=3D1>Norton Antivirus 2005</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D=
4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>8</font></td><td =
width=3D129> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp=
://top10oem.com/?i>Windows 2003 Server</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D=
4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>9</font></td><td =
width=3D129> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp=
://top10oem.com/?F>Alias Maya 6 Wavefrt</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D=
4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>10</font></td><td=
 width=3D129> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhtt=
p://top10oem.com/?n>Adobe </a></font> <a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?F> <f=
ont face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Illustrator 11</font></a></td>=
</tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td colSpan=3D2 width=3D141><span class=3D=
small><b> <font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>See more by this manufacturer</fon=
t></b></span></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8>&nbsp;</=
td><td width=3D129> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=
=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?U>Microsoft</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>=
&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D129><a href=3Dhttp://top10=
oem.com/?o> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Symantec</font><=
/a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td wid=
th=3D129> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://=
top10oem.com/?x>Adobe</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td=
 colSpan=3D2 width=3D141><span class=3Dsmall><b> <font face=3DVerdana size=
=3D1>Customers also bought</font></b></span></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&n=
bsp;</td><td width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D129> <font face=3Dverdana,ar=
ial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?N>these other items=
..</a></font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></td><=
/tr></table></td><td vAlign=3Dtop align=3Dleft width=3D530><p><b class=3Ds=
ans>Microsoft Office Professional Edition *2003*</b><br> <span class=3Dsma=
ll><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?1>Microsoft</a><img border=3D0 src=3Dhtt=
p://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker/newest_version.gif =
width=3D82 height=3D14></span><br></p><table border=3D0><tr><td noWrap><b =
class=3Dsmall>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=3Dtop noWrap><table cellSpacing=3D=
0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 width=3D170><tr><td width=3D135><a href=3Dhtt=
p://top10oem.com/?q> <select name=3Dedit1> <option selected>View Other Tit=
les</option> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=3D35>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp:=
//top10oem.com/?V><input type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazo=
n.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif value=3DGo border=3D=
0 name=3Dsubmit.display-variation width=3D21 height=3D21></a></td></tr></t=
able></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?W> <img height=3D=
155 src=3Dhttp://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0000AZJVC.01.TZZZZZZZ.jpg wid=
th=3D121 align=3Dleft border=3D0 name=3Dprod_image></a><span class=3Dsmall=
></p><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 height=3D21 width=3D=
189><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 wi=
dth=3D73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=
=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><span class=3Dlistprice>$499.00</span></t=
d></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18=
 width=3D73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3D=
small height=3D18 width=3D105><b class=3Dprice>$69.99</b></td></tr><tr><td=
 class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D1 width=3D73> <b=
>You Save:</b></td><td height=3D1 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=
=3D1 width=3D105><span class=3Dprice>$429.01 (86%)</span></td></tr></table=
><p><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?h> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-image=
s.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=3D113 =
height=3D23></a><br><br> <b>Availability:</b> Available for INSTANT downlo=
ad!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> fUYiHloa<br> &nbsp;</p><p></span><span class=3D=
tiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #1<br> </span><span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp:/=
/top10oem.com/?6>System requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3Dhttp://to=
p10oem.com/?k>Other Versions</a></span><span class=3Dtiny><br> <b>Date Cou=
pon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=3Dtiny><b>Averag=
e Customer Review:</b><img height=3D12 alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" src=3Dhttp=
://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars-=
5-0.gif width=3D64 border=3D0> Based on 144256 reviews. <a href=3Dhttp://t=
op10oem.com/?x>Write a review</a>.</font></p> <hr noShade SIZE=3D1><table =
border=3D0 cellpadding=3D0 cellspacing=3D0 style=3D"border-collapse: colla=
pse" bordercolor=3D#111111 width=3D100% id=3DAutoNumber1 height=3D55><tr><=
td width=3D100% height=3D55><p><b class=3Dsans>Adobe Photoshop CS2 V 9.0</=
b><br> <span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?7>Adobe</a><img =
border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker=
/newest_version.gif width=3D82 height=3D14></span><br></p><table border=3D=
0><tr><td noWrap><b class=3Dsmall>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=3Dtop noWrap>=
<table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 width=3D164><tr><td widt=
h=3D126><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?v> <select name=3Dedit1> <option se=
lected>View Other Titles</option> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=3D38>=
&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?e><input type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3D=
http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gi=
f value=3DGo border=3D0 name=3Dsubmit.display-variation width=3D21 height=3D=
21></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.co=
m/?s> <img height=3D150 src=3Dhttp://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00081I6JI=
01._PE7_SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg width=3D144 align=3Dleft border=3D0 name=3Dprod_i=
mage></a><span class=3Dsmall></p><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 bo=
rder=3D0 height=3D21 width=3D189><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap=
 align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=3D=
18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><span class=3D=
listprice>$599.00</span></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWra=
p align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 =
width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><b class=3Dprice=
>$69.99</b></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Drig=
ht height=3D1 width=3D73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td height=3D1 width=3D11><=
/td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D1 width=3D105><span class=3Dprice>$529.01 (=
90%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?A> <img bor=
der=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-y=
ellow-short.gif width=3D113 height=3D23></a><br><br> <b>Availability:</b> =
Available for INSTANT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> 2RjNS0<br> &nbsp;<=
/p><p></span><span class=3Dtiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #2<br> </span><span cla=
ss=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?b>System requirements</a>&nbsp; =
|&nbsp; <a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?O>Other Versions</a></span><span cl=
ass=3Dtiny><br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> </span><=
font class=3Dtiny><b>Average Customer Review:</b><img height=3D12 alt=3D"5=
 out of 5 stars" src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/com=
mon/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=3D64 border=3D0> Based on 17472 r=
eviews. <a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?Y>Write a review</a>.</font></p> </=
font><hr noShade SIZE=3D1></td></tr><tr><td width=3D100% height=3D55><p><b=
 class=3Dsans>Microsoft Windows XP Professional or Longhorn Edition</b><br=
> <span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?Z>Microsoft</a><img b=
order=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker/=
newest_version.gif width=3D82 height=3D14></span><br></p><table border=3D0=
><tr><td noWrap><b class=3Dsmall>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=3Dtop noWrap><=
table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 width=3D164><tr><td width=
=3D126><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?2> <select name=3Dedit1> <option sel=
ected>View Other Titles</option> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=3D38>&=
nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?2><input type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dh=
ttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif=
 value=3DGo border=3D0 name=3Dsubmit.display-variation width=3D21 height=3D=
21></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.co=
m/?A> <img height=3D150 src=3Dhttp://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005MOTG=
01._SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg width=3D118 align=3Dleft border=3D0 name=3Dprod_image=
 hspace=3D5></a><span class=3Dsmall></p><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=
=3D0 border=3D0 height=3D21 width=3D189><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop=
 noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td h=
eight=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><span=
 class=3Dlistprice>$279.00</span></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3D=
top noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>Price:</b></td><td hei=
ght=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><b clas=
s=3Dprice>$49.99</b></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap al=
ign=3Dright height=3D1 width=3D73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td height=3D1 wid=
th=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D1 width=3D105><span class=3Dprice>=
$229.01 (85%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?W>=
 <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-=
to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=3D113 height=3D23></a><br><br> <b>Availabil=
ity:</b> Available for INSTANT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> RLQPV<br>=
 &nbsp;</p><p></span><span class=3Dtiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #3</span><span =
class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?A><br> System requirements</a=
>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?A>Other Versions</a></span>=
<span class=3Dtiny><br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> =
</span><font class=3Dtiny><b>Average Customer Review:</b><img height=3D12 =
alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-lo=
cale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=3D64 border=3D0> Based on=
 194367 reviews. <a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?Z>Write a review</a>.</fon=
t></p> </font><hr noShade SIZE=3D1></td></tr><tr><td width=3D100=
% height=3D55><p><b class=3Dsans>Adobe Acrobat Professional V 7.0</b><br> =
<span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?P>Adobe</a><img border=3D=
0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker/newest_v=
ersion.gif width=3D82 height=3D14></span><br></p><table border=3D0><tr><td=
 noWrap><b class=3Dsmall>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=3Dtop noWrap><table ce=
llSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 width=3D164><tr><td width=3D126><=
a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?f> <select name=3Dedit1> <option selected>Vi=
ew Other Titles</option> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=3D38>&nbsp;<a =
href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?3><input type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-=
images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif value=3D=
Go border=3D0 name=3Dsubmit.display-variation width=3D21 height=3D21></a><=
/td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?l> <i=
mg height=3D150 src=3Dhttp://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00069E7KO.01.LZZZ=
ZZZZ.jpg width=3D175 align=3Dleft border=3D0 name=3Dprod_image></a><span c=
lass=3Dsmall></p><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 height=3D=
21 width=3D189><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright hei=
ght=3D18 width=3D73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></t=
d><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><span class=3Dlistprice>$499.0=
0</span></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright =
height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td>=
<td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><b class=3Dprice>$69.99</b></td>=
</tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D1 wi=
dth=3D73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td height=3D1 width=3D11></td><td class=3D=
small height=3D1 width=3D105><span class=3Dprice>$429.01 (85%)</span></td>=
</tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://top10oem.com/?L> <img border=3D0 src=3Dht=
tp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif =
width=3D113 height=3D23></a><br><br> <b>Availability:</b> Available for IN=
STANT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> v0JE8<br> &nbsp;</span></p><p><spa=
n class=3Dtiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #4</span><span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dh=
ttp://top10oem.com/?3><br> System requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3D=
http://top10oem.com/?d>Other Versions</a></span><span class=3Dtiny><br> <b=
>Date Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=3Dtiny>=
<b>Average Customer Review:</b><img height=3D12 alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" s=
rc=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-revie=
ws/stars-5-0.gif width=3D64 border=3D0> Based on 1295 reviews. <a href=3Dh=
ttp://top10oem.com/?B>Write a review</a>.</font></p> </font><p></p> <hr no=
Shade SIZE=3D1></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></form></td></tr></tabl=
e></body></html>

----515289522427732617--

Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 16:13:47 -0400
From: Francisco Obispo <[email-masked]>
CC: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Sender: [email-masked]

I'm OK with that too!!

I'm developing an open-registration system based on ISC's OpenReg,
which will be used
for many ccTLDs in latin america.

Francisco Obispo (.VE)

Eugenio Pinto wrote:

> I'm OK with that
>
> --eugenio (.PT)
>
>
> Ram Mohan wrote:
>
>> Scott, all,
>>
>>
>>> This is another one of those things that we should really
>>> consider removing (if no one is using it) or revising (if it's
>>> not quite right).
>>>
>>
>>
>> We should consider re-initiating the provreg group. A number of
>> changes are due in EPP, and enough registries are now using EPP
>> that actual practice has exposed both issues and deviances from
>> the protocol. Further, registries have implemented extensions
>> that, in some cases, make more sense to be part of a standard --
>> the case of what happened with RGP is relevant here.
>>
>> In the ICANN meeting in Luxembourg, I spoke with a number of gTLD
>> registries, who expressed interest in reviving the group.
>> Specifically, I spoke with GNR, PIR, .TEL, MTLD, VeriSign and
>> NeuStar; presumably direct notes from these registries are
>> forth-coming. Several ccTLD registries also expressed interest
>> in the topic, but did not outright have an opinion on restarting
>> provreg.
>>
>> In light of both changes in practice and interest from
>> practitioners, I would like to ask members of this list to
>> express their opinion and interest in the re-initiation of the
>> provreg group.
>>
>> -Ram
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> Ram Mohan Chief Technology Officer Vice President, Business
>> Operations Afilias (http://www.afilias.info) p: +1.215.706.5700
>> x103; f: +1.215.706.5701 m: +1.215.431.0958 e:
>> [email-masked]
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 14:26:27 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: "Ram Mohan" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

> In light of both changes in practice and interest from 
> practitioners, I
> would like to ask members of this list to express their 
> opinion and interest
> in the re-initiation of the provreg group.

I'm all for it IFF there is a suitable description formed of the work to
be done.  What I've seen so far is pretty sparse.

-Scott-

Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 19:04:11 +0100
From: Eugenio Pinto <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Sender: [email-masked]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------090800070105010102030602
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I'm OK with that

--eugenio (.PT)

Ram Mohan wrote:

>Scott, all,
>  
>
>>This is another one of those things that we should really consider removing
>>(if no one is using it) or revising (if it's not quite right).
>>    
>>
>
>We should consider re-initiating the provreg group.  A number of changes are
>due in EPP, and enough registries are now using EPP that actual practice has
>exposed both issues and deviances from the protocol.  Further, registries
>have implemented extensions that, in some cases, make more sense to be part
>of a standard -- the case of what happened with RGP is relevant here.
>
>In the ICANN meeting in Luxembourg, I spoke with a number of gTLD
>registries, who expressed interest in reviving the group.  Specifically, I
>spoke with GNR, PIR, .TEL, MTLD, VeriSign and NeuStar; presumably direct
>notes from these registries are forth-coming.  Several ccTLD registries also
>expressed interest in the topic, but did not outright have an opinion on
>restarting provreg.
>
>In light of both changes in practice and interest from practitioners, I
>would like to ask members of this list to express their opinion and interest
>in the re-initiation of the provreg group.
>
>-Ram
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Ram Mohan
>Chief Technology Officer
>Vice President, Business Operations
>Afilias (http://www.afilias.info)
>p: +1.215.706.5700 x103; f: +1.215.706.5701
>m: +1.215.431.0958
>e: [email-masked]
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  
>

--------------090800070105010102030602
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
I'm OK with that<br>
<br>
--eugenio (.PT)<br>
<br>
<br>
Ram Mohan wrote:
<blockquote cite="[email-masked]"
 type="cite">
  <pre wrap="">Scott, all,
  </pre>
  <blockquote type="cite">
    <pre wrap="">This is another one of those things that we should really consider removing
(if no one is using it) or revising (if it's not quite right).
    </pre>
  </blockquote>
  <pre wrap=""><!---->
We should consider re-initiating the provreg group.  A number of changes are
due in EPP, and enough registries are now using EPP that actual practice has
exposed both issues and deviances from the protocol.  Further, registries
have implemented extensions that, in some cases, make more sense to be part
of a standard -- the case of what happened with RGP is relevant here.

In the ICANN meeting in Luxembourg, I spoke with a number of gTLD
registries, who expressed interest in reviving the group.  Specifically, I
spoke with GNR, PIR, .TEL, MTLD, VeriSign and NeuStar; presumably direct
notes from these registries are forth-coming.  Several ccTLD registries also
expressed interest in the topic, but did not outright have an opinion on
restarting provreg.

In light of both changes in practice and interest from practitioners, I
would like to ask members of this list to express their opinion and interest
in the re-initiation of the provreg group.

-Ram
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ram Mohan
Chief Technology Officer
Vice President, Business Operations
Afilias (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.afilias.info">http://www.afilias.info</a>)
p: +1.215.706.5700 x103; f: +1.215.706.5701
m: +1.215.431.0958
e: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:[email-masked]">[email-masked]</a>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

  </pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------090800070105010102030602--

From: "Ram Mohan" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" <[email-masked]>, "'Klaus Malorny'" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 13:13:00 -0400
Organization: Afilias
Sender: [email-masked]

Scott, all,
>This is another one of those things that we should really consider removing
>(if no one is using it) or revising (if it's not quite right).

We should consider re-initiating the provreg group.  A number of changes are
due in EPP, and enough registries are now using EPP that actual practice has
exposed both issues and deviances from the protocol.  Further, registries
have implemented extensions that, in some cases, make more sense to be part
of a standard -- the case of what happened with RGP is relevant here.

In the ICANN meeting in Luxembourg, I spoke with a number of gTLD
registries, who expressed interest in reviving the group.  Specifically, I
spoke with GNR, PIR, .TEL, MTLD, VeriSign and NeuStar; presumably direct
notes from these registries are forth-coming.  Several ccTLD registries also
expressed interest in the topic, but did not outright have an opinion on
restarting provreg.

In light of both changes in practice and interest from practitioners, I
would like to ask members of this list to express their opinion and interest
in the re-initiation of the provreg group.

-Ram
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ram Mohan
Chief Technology Officer
Vice President, Business Operations
Afilias (http://www.afilias.info)
p: +1.215.706.5700 x103; f: +1.215.706.5701
m: +1.215.431.0958
e: [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 16:43:39 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
To: "Klaus Malorny" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]

Thoughts below...

> From: Klaus Malorny [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 2:35 PM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
> 
> I did not read the whole thread, so it may have been 
> mentioned there. Today, I 
> discovered a small syntactic issue in the examples given in 
> section 2.9. of RFC 
> 3733. The elements that are used to describe the disclosure 
> are missing the 
> final slash, as they are empty.
> 
> - - - 8< - - -
>     <contact:name type="int">
>     <contact:name type="loc">
>     <contact:org type="int">
>     <contact:org type="loc">
>     <contact:addr type="int">
>     <contact:addr type="loc">
>     <contact:voice>
>     <contact:fax>
>     <contact:email>
> 
>     Example <contact:disclose> element, flag="0":
> 
>     <contact:disclose flag="0">
>       <contact:email>
>       <contact:voice>
>     </contact:disclose>
> 
> 
>     Example <contact:disclose> element, flag="1":
> 
>     <contact:disclose flag="1">
>       <contact:name type="int">
>       <contact:org type="int">
>       <contact:addr type="int">
>     </contact:disclose>
> - - - 8< - - -
> 
> should read
> 
> - - - 8< - - -
>     <contact:name type="int"/>
>     <contact:name type="loc"/>
>     <contact:org type="int"/>
>     <contact:org type="loc"/>
>     <contact:addr type="int"/>
>     <contact:addr type="loc"/>
>     <contact:voice/>
>     <contact:fax/>
>     <contact:email/>
> 
>     Example <contact:disclose> element, flag="0":
> 
>     <contact:disclose flag="0">
>       <contact:email/>
>       <contact:voice/>
>     </contact:disclose>
> 
> 
>     Example <contact:disclose> element, flag="1":
> 
>     <contact:disclose flag="1">
>       <contact:name type="int"/>
>       <contact:org type="int"/>
>       <contact:addr type="int"/>
>     </contact:disclose>
> - - - 8< - - -

You're exactly correct.  Thanks for catching those errors.

> One thing that really puzzles me in this context is that a 
> registrar cannot 
> allow the disclosure of one component (that is normally not 
> disclosed) and to 
> disallow the disclosure of another component (that his 
> normally disclosed) at 
> the same time. But maybe I am just misunderstanding the 
> wording. I think I have 
> to reread this at a later point in time.

Remember that the whole "disclose" thing got crammed into the spec at
the last minute at the demand of the IESG.  There were parts that didn't
make sense then (to me anyway) and I'm sure they still don't make sense
now.  This is another one of those things that we should really consider
removing (if no one is using it) or revising (if it's not quite right).

-Scott-

Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 19:41:28 +0100
From: Eugenio Pinto <[email-masked]>
To: Klaus Malorny <[email-masked]>
CC: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Operations
Sender: [email-masked]

Hi Klaus!

Thanks for your answer. It was all I need to know.

--eugenio

Klaus Malorny wrote:

> Jens-Uwe Gaspar wrote:
>
>> Dear Eugenio Pinto,
>>
>> your understanding of host-attributes / host-objects is not accurate.
>>
>> Let's assume the .pt-registry is using EPP1.0.
>>
>> A registry decides which "host-concept" they want to use:
>>
>>   a) host-objects, or else
>>   b) host-attributes
>>
>> Let's consider this with an example: we want to create a domain with 
>> some
>> nameservers:
>>
>>   create domain 'foo.pt' with:
>>     nameserver #1: 'ns.foo.pt'
>>     nameserver #2: 'ns.bar.pt'
>>     nameserver #3: 'ns.baz.com'
>>
>> for (a):
>>   all nameservers must be created with an EPP create:host-command,
>>   nameserver #1 and #2 also need an IP because they are within the
>>   .pt-ZONE. After that you can create the domain using the created
>>   host-objects using <domain:ns>.
>>
>> for (b):
>>   the nameservers are implicitly created given as parameter
>>   (attributes) to a create:domain-command using <domain:hostAttr>.
>>   Here only nameserver #1 needs an IP, because 'ns.foo.pt' is a
>>   subordinate or glue-nameserver for the domain 'foo.pt'.
>>
>> That's only a short usage. There are other implications of using
>> host-objects or host-attributes. Read about them in the mail-archive
>> of the provreg-list as Scott already mentioned.
>>
>> Hope this helps a bit.
>>
>> PS: BTW, also DNSBE (registry for .be) are using host-attributes with 
>> EPP.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Jens-Uwe Gaspar
>>
>> Eugenio Pinto wrote:
>>
>>> In Portugal (.pt) we are using host attributes for all domain 
>>> delegations.
>>>
>>> The EPP feature that Scott remembered:
>>>
>>> "With host objects you can change an IP address, for example, 
>>> without having to update (a potentially large number of) domains 
>>> individually."
>>>
>>> turned us to the object concept of hosts.
>>>
>>> Now, with the introduction of EPP, we will have 2 different concepts:
>>>
>>> 1 - Internal hosts : objects with a "sponsoring client" witch is the 
>>> "sponsoring client" of the superordinate domain name of that host
>>>
>>> 2 - External hosts : it's only needed a <domain:hostAttr> element 
>>> with no IP adresses
>>>
>>> We were thinking about creating these external hosts as objects too. 
>>> As they don't have IP addresses it's not necessary to update them. 
>>> And we can just delete them if they are not associated with domain 
>>> names anymore..
>>>
>>> This would be an implicit creation of hosts at the domain creation 
>>> (excluding the <host:create> operation) and could possibly be used 
>>> to the other type of hosts.
>>>
>>> Have you any comments about this implementation?
>>>
>>> --eugenio
>>>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> just to clarify the term "implicit host creation": Readers of this 
> term might think that host objects (RFC 3732) would be created 
> implicitly with the host attributes. However, it is required that host 
> objects may not be used in parallel with the host attributes.
>
> Section 1.1 RFC 3731
>
>    »A server operator MUST use one name server
>    specification form consistently.  A server operator that announces
>    support for host objects in an EPP greeting MUST NOT allow domain
>    attributes to describe a name server host machine.  A server operator
>    that does not announce support for host objects MUST allow domain
>    attributes to describe a name server host machine.«
>
> regards,
>
> Klaus
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________ 
>
>      |       |
>      | knipp |                   Knipp  Medien und Kommunikation GmbH
>       -------                           Technologiepark
>                                         Martin-Schmeißer-Weg 9
>      Dipl. Inf. Klaus Malorny           44227 Dortmund
>      [email-masked]             Tel. +49 231 9703 0
>
>

Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 19:37:15 +0100
From: Eugenio Pinto <[email-masked]>
To: Jens-Uwe Gaspar <[email-masked]>
CC: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Operations
Sender: [email-masked]

Hi!

Thanks for your answer. I have some comments inside it.

--eugenio

Jens-Uwe Gaspar wrote:

> Dear Eugenio Pinto,
>
> apologies, forget my previous mail, your understanding of 
> host-attr/objects
> is correct. I didn't correctly catch your "main question".
>
> If you want internally use host-objects as you described, it's totally
> normal to implicitly create objects for it in your repository.
> IMHO in mostly every database-model used to describe domains with host-
> attributes you need some kind of "host-objects" in your database.
>
> You may get problems when you treat your "db-host-objects" as real
> "host-objects" linking them also to other domains, because to other
> domains the "host-object" with IP is a host WITHOUT IP (e.g. 'foo.pt' 
> with
> ns 'ns.foo.pt' and an IP <=> 'bar.pt' with same ns has no IP, because 
> it's
> not a glue).
> That should be avoided. It could lead to a problem when deleting
> domains. You can create separate "host-objects" in your database when
> used with other domains, or use some (complex) logic to remove the IPs
> from the host when deleting its parent domain.

I think it's not so complex..

--eugenio

>
> To which fields you are mapping the values from an EPP-domain-request
> with hosts (with or without IPs) is up to you. You don't even need
> to store the "sponsoring-client" for a host (it's implicitly defined
> by the relationship to the domain).
>

Yes, we are doing it but for the superordinate domain.

--eugenio

> Kind regards,
>
> Jens-Uwe Gaspar
>
> Jens-Uwe Gaspar wrote:
>
>> Dear Eugenio Pinto,
>>
>> your understanding of host-attributes / host-objects is not accurate.
>> ...
>> PS: BTW, also DNSBE (registry for .be) are using host-attributes with 
>> EPP.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Jens-Uwe Gaspar
>>
>> Eugenio Pinto wrote:
>>
>>> In Portugal (.pt) we are using host attributes for all domain 
>>> delegations.
>>>
>>> The EPP feature that Scott remembered:
>>>
>>> "With host objects you can change an IP address, for example, 
>>> without having to update (a potentially large number of) domains 
>>> individually."
>>>
>>> turned us to the object concept of hosts.
>>>
>>> Now, with the introduction of EPP, we will have 2 different concepts:
>>>
>>> 1 - Internal hosts : objects with a "sponsoring client" witch is the 
>>> "sponsoring client" of the superordinate domain name of that host
>>>
>>> 2 - External hosts : it's only needed a <domain:hostAttr> element 
>>> with no IP adresses
>>>
>>> We were thinking about creating these external hosts as objects too. 
>>> As they don't have IP addresses it's not necessary to update them. 
>>> And we can just delete them if they are not associated with domain 
>>> names anymore..
>>>
>>> This would be an implicit creation of hosts at the domain creation 
>>> (excluding the <host:create> operation) and could possibly be used 
>>> to the other type of hosts.
>>>
>>> Have you any comments about this implementation?
>>>
>>> --eugenio
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I am anyway questioning the usefulness of having host objects in 
>>>>> EPP at all. IMHO the only purpose for a host object is for the 
>>>>> host-to-IP mapping i.e. for the glue records. And glue records are 
>>>>> only needed, if a nameserver is resolving its own superordinate 
>>>>> domainname (neglecting the crossover games and stuff, which anyway 
>>>>> are hard to detect). With host-as-attribute it is rather easy to 
>>>>> require such a missing IP (just reject a domain create/update 
>>>>> request, if name server attribute is subordinate and has no IP). 
>>>>> Therefore I also do not see, why external hosts and internal 
>>>>> hosts, which do not resolve the superordinate domainname, are 
>>>>> treated differently in EPP. Or did I miss something here?
>>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bernie, given that this was discussed extensively on the provreg list
>>>> it's best if you review the provreg archives to get the scoop on the
>>>> rationale.  google can help find specific messages.  One benefit I
>>>> remember involved updates.  With host objects you can change an IP
>>>> address, for example, without having to update (a potentially large
>>>> number of) domains individually.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for letting me know that you're using host attributes.  That's
>>>> just the kind of info that needs to be shared.
>>>>
>>>> -Scott-
>>>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Jens-Uwe Gaspar                              Schlund + Partner AG
> E-Mail: [email-masked]                       Brauerstr. 48
> Tel. +49-721-91374-50                        76135 Karlsruhe, Germany
> Fax  +49-721-91374-20                        http://www.schlund.de

Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 20:35:27 +0200
From: Klaus Malorny <[email-masked]>
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
CC: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Document Updates
Sender: [email-masked]

Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:

 > [...]

> -Scott-

Hi Scott,

I did not read the whole thread, so it may have been mentioned there. Today, I 
discovered a small syntactic issue in the examples given in section 2.9. of RFC 
3733. The elements that are used to describe the disclosure are missing the 
final slash, as they are empty.

- - - 8< - - -
    <contact:name type="int">
    <contact:name type="loc">
    <contact:org type="int">
    <contact:org type="loc">
    <contact:addr type="int">
    <contact:addr type="loc">
    <contact:voice>
    <contact:fax>
    <contact:email>

    Example <contact:disclose> element, flag="0":

    <contact:disclose flag="0">
      <contact:email>
      <contact:voice>
    </contact:disclose>

    Example <contact:disclose> element, flag="1":

    <contact:disclose flag="1">
      <contact:name type="int">
      <contact:org type="int">
      <contact:addr type="int">
    </contact:disclose>
- - - 8< - - -

should read

- - - 8< - - -
    <contact:name type="int"/>
    <contact:name type="loc"/>
    <contact:org type="int"/>
    <contact:org type="loc"/>
    <contact:addr type="int"/>
    <contact:addr type="loc"/>
    <contact:voice/>
    <contact:fax/>
    <contact:email/>

    Example <contact:disclose> element, flag="0":

    <contact:disclose flag="0">
      <contact:email/>
      <contact:voice/>
    </contact:disclose>

    Example <contact:disclose> element, flag="1":

    <contact:disclose flag="1">
      <contact:name type="int"/>
      <contact:org type="int"/>
      <contact:addr type="int"/>
    </contact:disclose>
- - - 8< - - -

One thing that really puzzles me in this context is that a registrar cannot 
allow the disclosure of one component (that is normally not disclosed) and to 
disallow the disclosure of another component (that his normally disclosed) at 
the same time. But maybe I am just misunderstanding the wording. I think I have 
to reread this at a later point in time.

regards,

Klaus

___________________________________________________________________________
      |       |
      | knipp |                   Knipp  Medien und Kommunikation GmbH
       -------                           Technologiepark
                                         Martin-Schmeißer-Weg 9
      Dipl. Inf. Klaus Malorny           44227 Dortmund
      [email-masked]             Tel. +49 231 9703 0

Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 20:20:52 +0200
From: Klaus Malorny <[email-masked]>
To: Jens-Uwe Gaspar <[email-masked]>
CC: Eugenio Pinto <[email-masked]>, "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>, Bernie Hoeneisen <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Operations
Sender: [email-masked]

Jens-Uwe Gaspar wrote:

> Dear Eugenio Pinto,
> 
> your understanding of host-attributes / host-objects is not accurate.
> 
> Let's assume the .pt-registry is using EPP1.0.
> 
> A registry decides which "host-concept" they want to use:
> 
>   a) host-objects, or else
>   b) host-attributes
> 
> Let's consider this with an example: we want to create a domain with some
> nameservers:
> 
>   create domain 'foo.pt' with:
>     nameserver #1: 'ns.foo.pt'
>     nameserver #2: 'ns.bar.pt'
>     nameserver #3: 'ns.baz.com'
> 
> for (a):
>   all nameservers must be created with an EPP create:host-command,
>   nameserver #1 and #2 also need an IP because they are within the
>   .pt-ZONE. After that you can create the domain using the created
>   host-objects using <domain:ns>.
> 
> for (b):
>   the nameservers are implicitly created given as parameter
>   (attributes) to a create:domain-command using <domain:hostAttr>.
>   Here only nameserver #1 needs an IP, because 'ns.foo.pt' is a
>   subordinate or glue-nameserver for the domain 'foo.pt'.
> 
> That's only a short usage. There are other implications of using
> host-objects or host-attributes. Read about them in the mail-archive
> of the provreg-list as Scott already mentioned.
> 
> Hope this helps a bit.
> 
> PS: BTW, also DNSBE (registry for .be) are using host-attributes with EPP.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Jens-Uwe Gaspar
> 
> Eugenio Pinto wrote:
> 
>> In Portugal (.pt) we are using host attributes for all domain 
>> delegations.
>>
>> The EPP feature that Scott remembered:
>>
>> "With host objects you can change an IP address, for example, without 
>> having to update (a potentially large number of) domains individually."
>>
>> turned us to the object concept of hosts.
>>
>> Now, with the introduction of EPP, we will have 2 different concepts:
>>
>> 1 - Internal hosts : objects with a "sponsoring client" witch is the 
>> "sponsoring client" of the superordinate domain name of that host
>>
>> 2 - External hosts : it's only needed a <domain:hostAttr> element with 
>> no IP adresses
>>
>> We were thinking about creating these external hosts as objects too. 
>> As they don't have IP addresses it's not necessary to update them. And 
>> we can just delete them if they are not associated with domain names 
>> anymore..
>>
>> This would be an implicit creation of hosts at the domain creation 
>> (excluding the <host:create> operation) and could possibly be used to 
>> the other type of hosts.
>>
>> Have you any comments about this implementation?
>>
>> --eugenio
>>

Hi all,

just to clarify the term "implicit host creation": Readers of this term might 
think that host objects (RFC 3732) would be created implicitly with the host 
attributes. However, it is required that host objects may not be used in 
parallel with the host attributes.

Section 1.1 RFC 3731

    »A server operator MUST use one name server
    specification form consistently.  A server operator that announces
    support for host objects in an EPP greeting MUST NOT allow domain
    attributes to describe a name server host machine.  A server operator
    that does not announce support for host objects MUST allow domain
    attributes to describe a name server host machine.«

regards,

Klaus

___________________________________________________________________________
      |       |
      | knipp |                   Knipp  Medien und Kommunikation GmbH
       -------                           Technologiepark
                                         Martin-Schmeißer-Weg 9
      Dipl. Inf. Klaus Malorny           44227 Dortmund
      [email-masked]             Tel. +49 231 9703 0

Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 20:03:32 +0200
From: Jens-Uwe Gaspar <[email-masked]>
To: Eugenio Pinto <[email-masked]>
CC: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>, Bernie Hoeneisen <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Operations
Sender: [email-masked]

Dear Eugenio Pinto,

apologies, forget my previous mail, your understanding of host-attr/objects
is correct. I didn't correctly catch your "main question".

If you want internally use host-objects as you described, it's totally
normal to implicitly create objects for it in your repository.
IMHO in mostly every database-model used to describe domains with host-
attributes you need some kind of "host-objects" in your database.

You may get problems when you treat your "db-host-objects" as real
"host-objects" linking them also to other domains, because to other
domains the "host-object" with IP is a host WITHOUT IP (e.g. 'foo.pt' with
ns 'ns.foo.pt' and an IP <=> 'bar.pt' with same ns has no IP, because it's
not a glue).
That should be avoided. It could lead to a problem when deleting
domains. You can create separate "host-objects" in your database when
used with other domains, or use some (complex) logic to remove the IPs
from the host when deleting its parent domain.

To which fields you are mapping the values from an EPP-domain-request
with hosts (with or without IPs) is up to you. You don't even need
to store the "sponsoring-client" for a host (it's implicitly defined
by the relationship to the domain).

Kind regards,

Jens-Uwe Gaspar

Jens-Uwe Gaspar wrote:
> Dear Eugenio Pinto,
> 
> your understanding of host-attributes / host-objects is not accurate.
>...
> PS: BTW, also DNSBE (registry for .be) are using host-attributes with EPP.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Jens-Uwe Gaspar
> 
> Eugenio Pinto wrote:
>> In Portugal (.pt) we are using host attributes for all domain delegations.
>> 
>> The EPP feature that Scott remembered:
>> 
>> "With host objects you can change an IP address, for example, without 
>> having to update (a potentially large number of) domains individually."
>> 
>> turned us to the object concept of hosts.
>> 
>> Now, with the introduction of EPP, we will have 2 different concepts:
>> 
>> 1 - Internal hosts : objects with a "sponsoring client" witch is the "sponsoring client" of the superordinate domain name of that host
>> 
>> 2 - External hosts : it's only needed a <domain:hostAttr> element with no IP adresses
>> 
>> We were thinking about creating these external hosts as objects too. 
>> As they don't have IP addresses it's not necessary to update them. 
>> And we can just delete them if they are not associated with domain names anymore..
>> 
>> This would be an implicit creation of hosts at the domain creation (excluding the <host:create> operation) and could possibly be used to the other type of hosts.
>> 
>> Have you any comments about this implementation?
>> 
>> --eugenio
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>> 
>>>>I am anyway questioning the usefulness of having host objects 
>>>>in EPP at 
>>>>all. IMHO the only purpose for a host object is for the 
>>>>host-to-IP mapping 
>>>>i.e. for the glue records. And glue records are only needed, if a 
>>>>nameserver is resolving its own superordinate domainname 
>>>>(neglecting the 
>>>>crossover games and stuff, which anyway are hard to detect). With 
>>>>host-as-attribute it is rather easy to require such a missing IP 
>>>>(just reject a domain create/update request, if name server 
>>>>attribute is 
>>>>subordinate and has no IP). Therefore I also do not see, why external 
>>>>hosts and internal hosts, which do not resolve the superordinate 
>>>>domainname, are treated differently in EPP. Or did I miss 
>>>>something here?
>>>>    
>>>>
>>>
>>>Bernie, given that this was discussed extensively on the provreg list
>>>it's best if you review the provreg archives to get the scoop on the
>>>rationale.  google can help find specific messages.  One benefit I
>>>remember involved updates.  With host objects you can change an IP
>>>address, for example, without having to update (a potentially large
>>>number of) domains individually.
>>>
>>>Thanks for letting me know that you're using host attributes.  That's
>>>just the kind of info that needs to be shared.
>>>
>>>-Scott-

________________________________________________________________________
Jens-Uwe Gaspar                              Schlund + Partner AG
E-Mail: [email-masked]                       Brauerstr. 48
Tel. +49-721-91374-50                        76135 Karlsruhe, Germany
Fax  +49-721-91374-20                        http://www.schlund.de

Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 19:25:39 +0200
From: Jens-Uwe Gaspar <[email-masked]>
To: Eugenio Pinto <[email-masked]>
CC: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>, Bernie Hoeneisen <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Operations
Sender: [email-masked]

Dear Eugenio Pinto,

your understanding of host-attributes / host-objects is not accurate.

Let's assume the .pt-registry is using EPP1.0.

A registry decides which "host-concept" they want to use:

   a) host-objects, or else
   b) host-attributes

Let's consider this with an example: we want to create a domain with some
nameservers:

   create domain 'foo.pt' with:
     nameserver #1: 'ns.foo.pt'
     nameserver #2: 'ns.bar.pt'
     nameserver #3: 'ns.baz.com'

for (a):
   all nameservers must be created with an EPP create:host-command,
   nameserver #1 and #2 also need an IP because they are within the
   .pt-ZONE. After that you can create the domain using the created
   host-objects using <domain:ns>.

for (b):
   the nameservers are implicitly created given as parameter
   (attributes) to a create:domain-command using <domain:hostAttr>.
   Here only nameserver #1 needs an IP, because 'ns.foo.pt' is a
   subordinate or glue-nameserver for the domain 'foo.pt'.

That's only a short usage. There are other implications of using
host-objects or host-attributes. Read about them in the mail-archive
of the provreg-list as Scott already mentioned.

Hope this helps a bit.

PS: BTW, also DNSBE (registry for .be) are using host-attributes with EPP.

Kind regards,

Jens-Uwe Gaspar

Eugenio Pinto wrote:
> In Portugal (.pt) we are using host attributes for all domain delegations.
> 
> The EPP feature that Scott remembered:
> 
> "With host objects you can change an IP address, for example, without 
> having to update (a potentially large number of) domains individually."
> 
> turned us to the object concept of hosts.
> 
> Now, with the introduction of EPP, we will have 2 different concepts:
> 
> 1 - Internal hosts : objects with a "sponsoring client" witch is the "sponsoring client" of the superordinate domain name of that host
> 
> 2 - External hosts : it's only needed a <domain:hostAttr> element with no IP adresses
> 
> We were thinking about creating these external hosts as objects too. 
> As they don't have IP addresses it's not necessary to update them. 
> And we can just delete them if they are not associated with domain names anymore..
> 
> This would be an implicit creation of hosts at the domain creation (excluding the <host:create> operation) and could possibly be used to the other type of hosts.
> 
> Have you any comments about this implementation?
> 
> --eugenio
> 
> 
> 
> Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> 
>>>I am anyway questioning the usefulness of having host objects 
>>>in EPP at 
>>>all. IMHO the only purpose for a host object is for the 
>>>host-to-IP mapping 
>>>i.e. for the glue records. And glue records are only needed, if a 
>>>nameserver is resolving its own superordinate domainname 
>>>(neglecting the 
>>>crossover games and stuff, which anyway are hard to detect). With 
>>>host-as-attribute it is rather easy to require such a missing IP 
>>>(just reject a domain create/update request, if name server 
>>>attribute is 
>>>subordinate and has no IP). Therefore I also do not see, why external 
>>>hosts and internal hosts, which do not resolve the superordinate 
>>>domainname, are treated differently in EPP. Or did I miss 
>>>something here?
>>>    
>>>
>>
>>Bernie, given that this was discussed extensively on the provreg list
>>it's best if you review the provreg archives to get the scoop on the
>>rationale.  google can help find specific messages.  One benefit I
>>remember involved updates.  With host objects you can change an IP
>>address, for example, without having to update (a potentially large
>>number of) domains individually.
>>
>>Thanks for letting me know that you're using host attributes.  That's
>>just the kind of info that needs to be shared.
>>
>>-Scott-

________________________________________________________________________
Jens-Uwe Gaspar                              Schlund + Partner AG
E-Mail: [email-masked]                       Brauerstr. 48
Tel. +49-721-91374-50                        76135 Karlsruhe, Germany
Fax  +49-721-91374-20                        http://www.schlund.de

Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 17:25:15 +0100
From: Eugenio Pinto <[email-masked]>
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>, Bernie Hoeneisen <[email-masked]>
CC: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: [ietf-provreg] EPP Operations
Sender: [email-masked]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------030702090601050705080906
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In Portugal (.pt) we are using host attributes for all domain delegations.

The EPP feature that Scott remembered:

"With host objects you can change an IP address, for example, without 
having to update (a potentially large number of) domains individually."

turned us to the object concept of hosts.

Now, with the introduction of EPP, we will have 2 different concepts:

1 - Internal hosts : objects with a "sponsoring client" witch is the "sponsoring client" of the superordinate domain name of that host

2 - External hosts : it's only needed a <domain:hostAttr> element with no IP adresses

We were thinking about creating these external hosts as objects too. 
As they don't have IP addresses it's not necessary to update them. 
And we can just delete them if they are not associated with domain names anymore..

This would be an implicit creation of hosts at the domain creation (excluding the <host:create> operation) and could possibly be used to the other type of hosts.

Have you any comments about this implementation?

--eugenio

Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:

>>I am anyway questioning the usefulness of having host objects 
>>in EPP at 
>>all. IMHO the only purpose for a host object is for the 
>>host-to-IP mapping 
>>i.e. for the glue records. And glue records are only needed, if a 
>>nameserver is resolving its own superordinate domainname 
>>(neglecting the 
>>crossover games and stuff, which anyway are hard to detect). With 
>>host-as-attribute it is rather easy to require such a missing IP 
>>(just reject a domain create/update request, if name server 
>>attribute is 
>>subordinate and has no IP). Therefore I also do not see, why external 
>>hosts and internal hosts, which do not resolve the superordinate 
>>domainname, are treated differently in EPP. Or did I miss 
>>something here?
>>    
>>
>
>Bernie, given that this was discussed extensively on the provreg list
>it's best if you review the provreg archives to get the scoop on the
>rationale.  google can help find specific messages.  One benefit I
>remember involved updates.  With host objects you can change an IP
>address, for example, without having to update (a potentially large
>number of) domains individually.
>
>Thanks for letting me know that you're using host attributes.  That's
>just the kind of info that needs to be shared.
>
>-Scott-
>  
>

--------------030702090601050705080906
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
In Portugal (.pt) we are using host attributes for all domain
delegations.<br>
<br>
The EPP feature that Scott remembered:<br>
<br>
"With host objects you can change an IP address, for example, without
having to update (a potentially large number of) domains individually."<br>
<pre wrap="">turned us to the object concept of hosts.

Now, with the introduction of EPP, we will have 2 different concepts:

1 - Internal hosts : objects with a "sponsoring client" witch is the "sponsoring client" of the superordinate domain name of that host

2 - External hosts : it's only needed a &lt;domain:hostAttr&gt; element with no IP adresses

We were thinking about creating these external hosts as objects too. 
As they don't have IP addresses it's not necessary to update them. 
And we can just delete them if they are not associated with domain names anymore..

This would be an implicit creation of hosts at the domain creation (excluding the &lt;host:create&gt; operation) and could possibly be used to the other type of hosts.

Have you any comments about this implementation?

--eugenio

</pre>
<br>
Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
<blockquote
 cite="[email-masked]"
 type="cite">
  <blockquote type="cite">
    <pre wrap="">I am anyway questioning the usefulness of having host objects 
in EPP at 
all. IMHO the only purpose for a host object is for the 
host-to-IP mapping 
i.e. for the glue records. And glue records are only needed, if a 
nameserver is resolving its own superordinate domainname 
(neglecting the 
crossover games and stuff, which anyway are hard to detect). With 
host-as-attribute it is rather easy to require such a missing IP 
(just reject a domain create/update request, if name server 
attribute is 
subordinate and has no IP). Therefore I also do not see, why external 
hosts and internal hosts, which do not resolve the superordinate 
domainname, are treated differently in EPP. Or did I miss 
something here?
    </pre>
  </blockquote>
  <pre wrap=""><!---->
Bernie, given that this was discussed extensively on the provreg list
it's best if you review the provreg archives to get the scoop on the
rationale.  google can help find specific messages.  One benefit I
remember involved updates.  With host objects you can change an IP
address, for example, without having to update (a potentially large
number of) domains individually.

Thanks for letting me know that you're using host attributes.  That's
just the kind of info that needs to be shared.

-Scott-
  </pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------030702090601050705080906--

From: "Ramona Samuels" <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: "Ramona Samuels" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Out of this WoRLD $aving$ on all Adobe, Windows titles
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 23:37:36 -0400

uh5 

----LL24BPen49C9n2j
Content-Type: text/html;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><head><style type=3Dtext/css>.eyebrow { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE=
: 10px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: uppercase; COLOR: #ffffff; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,ar=
ial,helvetica,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.eyebrow:link { TEXT-DE=
CORATION: none }</style><title>m</title><meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type co=
ntent=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252"><meta content=3D1yQ2 name=3D4d=
2J><meta content=3DZKF5 name=3DxJsc><style type=3Dtext/css>.serif { FONT-S=
IZE: small; FONT-FAMILY: times,serif } .sans { FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-FAMI=
LY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .small { FONT-SIZE: x-small; FONT=
-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .h1 { FONT-SIZE: small; COLO=
R: #cc6600; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .h3color { =
FONT-SIZE: x-small; COLOR: #cc6600; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, arial,helvetica,=
sans-serif } .tiny { FONT-SIZE: xx-small; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helve=
tica, sans-serif } .listprice { FONT-SIZE: x-small; FONT-FAMILY: arial,ver=
dana,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: line-through } .price { FONT-SIZE: x-sma=
ll; COLOR: #990000; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif } .tin=
yprice { FONT-SIZE: xx-small; COLOR: #990000; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,h=
elvetica,sans-serif } .attention { BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffd5 } .eyebrow { =
FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: uppercase; COLOR: #fff=
fff; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: non=
e } A.eyebrow:link { TEXT-DECORATION: none }</style><meta content=3Dvpok n=
ame=3DN07N></head><body text=3D#000000 vLink=3D#996633 aLink=3D#FF9933 lin=
k=3D#003399 bgColor=3D#FFFFFF><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=
=3D705 border=3D0><div align=3Dleft></table><table border=3D0 cellpadding=3D=
0 cellspacing=3D0 style=3D"border-collapse: collapse" bordercolor=3D#11111=
1 width=3D699 id=3DAutoNumber4 height=3D38><tr><td width=3D368 height=3D38=
><font face=3DVerdana size=3D2>Opt-in Email Special Offer&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
; </font><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.=
com/?W>unsubscribe me</a></font></td><td width=3D331 height=3D38><a href=3D=
http://oemworkshop.com/?a> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.co=
m/images/G/01/nav/personalized/cartwish/right-topnav-default-2.gif align=3D=
right width=3D300 height=3D22></a></td></tr></table></div><tbody><tr><td c=
lass=3Dsmall align=3Dmiddle bgColor=3D#ffffdd width=3D707></td></tr></tbod=
y></table><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D704 border=3D0><t=
r><td vAlign=3Dtop width=3D166><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 bord=
er=3D0><tr vAlign=3Dbottom align=3Dmiddle><td><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellP=
adding=3D0 width=3D155 border=3D0><tr vAlign=3Dtop bgColor=3D#333399><td w=
idth=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080> <img src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G=
/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-left-corner.gif width=3D5 height=3D5></td><td bgco=
lor=3D#000080><table cellSpacing=3D3 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D99=
% border=3D0><tr><td vAlign=3Dbottom> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica=
 color=3D#ffffff size=3D1> <b>SEARCH</b></font></td></tr></table></td><td =
align=3Dright width=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080> <img src=3Dhttp://g-images.amaz=
on.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-right-corner.gif width=3D5 height=3D=
5></td></tr></table></td></tr><tr vAlign=3Dtop align=3Dmiddle><td><table c=
ellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D1 width=3D155 bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=3D0><t=
r><td width=3D100%><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D4 width=3D100=
% bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=3D0><tr><td vAlign=3Dtop width=3D100=
% bgColor=3D#eeeecc> <select name=3Durl> <option selected>Software</option=
> </select> <input size=3D13 name=3Dfield-keywords> <a href=3Dhttp://oemwo=
rkshop.com/?A> <input type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.c=
om/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif align=3Dmiddle value=3D=
Go border=3D0 name=3DGo width=3D21 height=3D21></a> </form></td></tr></tab=
le></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><br><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadd=
ing=3D0 width=3D155 bgColor=3D#eeeecc border=3D0><tr vAlign=3Dbottom align=
=3Dmiddle><td><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D155 border=3D=
0><tr vAlign=3Dtop bgColor=3D#333399><td width=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080><font=
 size=3D1> <img src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow=
-upper-left-corner.gif width=3D5 height=3D5></font></td><td bgcolor=3D#000=
080><table cellSpacing=3D3 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D99% border=3D0><tr><td =
vAlign=3Dbottom><p align=3Dcenter><b> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica=
 size=3D1 color=3D#FFFFFF>TOP 10 NEW TITLES</font></b></p></td></tr></tabl=
e></td><td align=3Dright width=3D5 bgcolor=3D#000080><font size=3D1> <img =
src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/icons/eyebrow-upper-right-cor=
ner.gif width=3D5 height=3D5></font></td></tr></table></td></tr><tr><td><t=
able cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D1 width=3D100% bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=
=3D0><tr><td width=3D100%><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 width=3D1=
00% bgColor=3D#cccc99 border=3D0><tr><td vAlign=3Dtop width=3D100=
% bgColor=3D#eeeecc><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D2 width=3D153 bor=
der=3D0><tr><td width=3D141 colspan=3D3 bgcolor=3D#FFFFFF><p align=3Dcente=
r><b> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1 color=3D#CC6600>&nbsp;=
ON SALE NOW!</font></b></p></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td widt=
h=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>1</font></td><td width=3D129> <font fa=
ce=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?O=
>Office Pro 2003</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td widt=
h=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>2</font></td><td width=3D129><a href=3D=
http://oemworkshop.com/?6> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>A=
dobe Photoshop 9.0</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td wi=
dth=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>3</font></td><td width=3D129><a href=
=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?D> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D=
1>Windows XP Pro</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td widt=
h=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>4</font></td><td width=3D129><a href=3D=
http://oemworkshop.com/?q> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>A=
dobe Acrobat 7 Pro</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td wi=
dth=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>5</font></td><td width=3D129> <font =
face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/=
?l>Flash MX 2004</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td widt=
h=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>6</font></td><td width=3D129> <font fa=
ce=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?E=
>Corel Draw 12</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D=
8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>7</font></td><td width=3D129><a href=3Dhtt=
p://oemworkshop.com/?O> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Nort=
on Antivirus 2005</font></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td wid=
th=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>8</font></td><td width=3D129> <font f=
ace=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?=
G>Windows 2003 Server</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td=
 width=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>9</font></td><td width=3D129> <fo=
nt face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.c=
om/?w>Alias Maya 6 Wavefrt</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</t=
d><td width=3D8><font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>10</font></td><td width=3D12=
9> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://oemwork=
shop.com/?j>Adobe </a></font> <a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?F> <font f=
ace=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Illustrator 11</font></a></td></tr>=
<tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td colSpan=3D2 width=3D141><span class=3Dsma=
ll><b> <font face=3DVerdana size=3D1>See more by this manufacturer</font><=
/b></span></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8>&nbsp;</td>=
<td width=3D129> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3D=
http://oemworkshop.com/?J>Microsoft</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>=
&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D129><a href=3Dhttp://oemwo=
rkshop.com/?C> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1>Symantec</fon=
t></a></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td =
width=3D129> <font face=3Dverdana,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp=
://oemworkshop.com/?K>Adobe</a></font></td></tr><tr><td width=3D4>&nbsp;</=
td><td colSpan=3D2 width=3D141><span class=3Dsmall><b> <font face=3DVerdan=
a size=3D1>Customers also bought</font></b></span></td></tr><tr><td width=3D=
4>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D8>&nbsp;</td><td width=3D129> <font face=3Dverdan=
a,arial,helvetica size=3D1> <a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?s>these othe=
r items...</a></font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></td></tr></table=
></td></tr></table></td><td vAlign=3Dtop align=3Dleft width=3D530><p><b cl=
ass=3Dsans>Microsoft Office Professional Edition *2003*</b><br> <span clas=
s=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?G>Microsoft</a><img border=3D0=
 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker/newest_ve=
rsion.gif width=3D82 height=3D14></span><br></p><table border=3D0><tr><td =
noWrap><b class=3Dsmall>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=3Dtop noWrap><table cel=
lSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 width=3D170><tr><td width=3D135><a=
 href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?6> <select name=3Dedit1> <option selected>=
View Other Titles</option> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=3D35>&nbsp;<=
a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?J><input type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhttp=
://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif va=
lue=3DGo border=3D0 name=3Dsubmit.display-variation width=3D21 height=3D21=
></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.c=
om/?I> <img height=3D155 src=3Dhttp://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0000AZJV=
C.01.TZZZZZZZ.jpg width=3D121 align=3Dleft border=3D0 name=3Dprod_image></=
a><span class=3Dsmall></p><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D=
0 height=3D21 width=3D189><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3D=
right height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=
=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><span class=3Dlistpri=
ce>$499.00</span></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=
=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D=
11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><b class=3Dprice>$69.99<=
/b></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright heigh=
t=3D1 width=3D73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td height=3D1 width=3D11></td><td =
class=3Dsmall height=3D1 width=3D105><span class=3Dprice>$429.01 (86=
%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?p> <img bo=
rder=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-=
yellow-short.gif width=3D113 height=3D23></a><br><br> <b>Availability:</b>=
 Available for INSTANT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> ydr18Y9<br> &nbsp=
;</p><p></span><span class=3Dtiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #1<br> </span><span c=
lass=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?w>System requirements</a>&n=
bsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?b>Other Versions</a></span>=
<span class=3Dtiny><br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> =
</span><font class=3Dtiny><b>Average Customer Review:</b><img height=3D12 =
alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-lo=
cale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=3D64 border=3D0> Based on=
 172154 reviews. <a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?T>Write a review</a>.</=
font></p> <hr noShade SIZE=3D1><table border=3D0 cellpadding=3D0 cellspaci=
ng=3D0 style=3D"border-collapse: collapse" bordercolor=3D#111111 width=3D1=
00% id=3DAutoNumber1 height=3D55><tr><td width=3D100% height=3D55><p><b cl=
ass=3Dsans>Adobe Photoshop CS2 V 9.0</b><br> <span class=3Dsmall><a href=3D=
http://oemworkshop.com/?C>Adobe</a><img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.a=
mazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker/newest_version.gif width=3D82 hei=
ght=3D14></span><br></p><table border=3D0><tr><td noWrap><b class=3Dsmall>=
Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=3Dtop noWrap><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=
=3D0 border=3D0 width=3D164><tr><td width=3D126><a href=3Dhttp://oemworksh=
op.com/?n> <select name=3Dedit1> <option selected>View Other Titles</optio=
n> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=3D38>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://oemworks=
hop.com/?1><input type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/i=
mages/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif value=3DGo border=3D0 name=
=3Dsubmit.display-variation width=3D21 height=3D21></a></td></tr></table><=
/td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?J> <img height=3D150=
 src=3Dhttp://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00081I6JI.01._PE7_SCMZZZZZZZ_.jp=
g width=3D144 align=3Dleft border=3D0 name=3Dprod_image></a><span class=3D=
small></p><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 height=3D21 wi=
dth=3D189><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D=
18 width=3D73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td =
class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><span class=3Dlistprice>$599.00</spa=
n></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=
=3D18 width=3D73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td cl=
ass=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><b class=3Dprice>$69.99</b></td></tr><=
tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3Dright height=3D1 width=3D=
73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td height=3D1 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall =
height=3D1 width=3D105><span class=3Dprice>$529.01 (90%)</span></td></tr><=
/table><p><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?h> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp:=
//g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-cart-yellow-short.gif wid=
th=3D113 height=3D23></a><br><br> <b>Availability:</b> Available for INSTA=
NT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> ChJl2XW<br> &nbsp;</p><p></span><span=
 class=3Dtiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #2<br> </span><span class=3Dsmall><a href=
=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?w>System requirements</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=
=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?3>Other Versions</a></span><span class=3Dtiny><=
br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<br> </span><font class=3D=
tiny><b>Average Customer Review:</b><img height=3D12 alt=3D"5 out of 5 sta=
rs" src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-=
reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=3D64 border=3D0> Based on 188149 reviews. <a h=
ref=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?7>Write a review</a>.</font></p> </font><hr =
noShade SIZE=3D1></td></tr><tr><td width=3D100% height=3D55><p><b class=3D=
sans>Microsoft Windows XP Professional or Longhorn Edition</b><br> <span c=
lass=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?V>Microsoft</a><img border=3D=
0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker/newest_v=
ersion.gif width=3D82 height=3D14></span><br></p><table border=3D0><tr><td=
 noWrap><b class=3Dsmall>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=3Dtop noWrap><table ce=
llSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 width=3D164><tr><td width=3D126><=
a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?2> <select name=3Dedit1> <option selected=
>View Other Titles</option> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=3D38>&nbsp;=
<a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?B><input type=3Dimage alt=3DGo src=3Dhtt=
p://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-software.gif v=
alue=3DGo border=3D0 name=3Dsubmit.display-variation width=3D21 height=3D2=
1></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.=
com/?z> <img height=3D150 src=3Dhttp://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005MO=
TG.01._SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg width=3D118 align=3Dleft border=3D0 name=3Dprod_ima=
ge hspace=3D5></a><span class=3Dsmall></p><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPaddi=
ng=3D0 border=3D0 height=3D21 width=3D189><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dt=
op noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td=
 height=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><sp=
an class=3Dlistprice>$279.00</span></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3D=
top noWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>Price:</b></td><td hei=
ght=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><b clas=
s=3Dprice>$49.99</b></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap al=
ign=3Dright height=3D1 width=3D73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td height=3D1 wid=
th=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D1 width=3D105><span class=3Dprice>=
$229.01 (85%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/=
?L> <img border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/a=
dd-to-cart-yellow-short.gif width=3D113 height=3D23></a><br><br> <b>Availa=
bility:</b> Available for INSTANT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> FPRByh=
P<br> &nbsp;</p><p></span><span class=3Dtiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #3</span><=
span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?V><br> System require=
ments</a>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?I>Other Versions=
</a></span><span class=3Dtiny><br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st=
, 2005<br> </span><font class=3Dtiny><b>Average Customer Review:</b><img h=
eight=3D12 alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/image=
s/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=3D64 border=3D=
0> Based on 155843 reviews. <a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?x>Write a re=
view</a>.</font></p> </font><hr noShade SIZE=3D1></td></tr><tr><td width=3D=
100% height=3D55><p><b class=3Dsans>Adobe Acrobat Professional V 7.0</b><b=
r> <span class=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?b>Adobe</a><img b=
order=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/promotions/sticker/=
newest_version.gif width=3D82 height=3D14></span><br></p><table border=3D0=
><tr><td noWrap><b class=3Dsmall>Choose:</b></td><td vAlign=3Dtop noWrap><=
table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0 width=3D164><tr><td width=
=3D126><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?S> <select name=3Dedit1> <option =
selected>View Other Titles</option> </select></a></td><td noWrap width=3D3=
8>&nbsp;<a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?o><input type=3Dimage alt=3DGo s=
rc=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/search-browse/go-button-softwa=
re.gif value=3DGo border=3D0 name=3Dsubmit.display-variation width=3D21 he=
ight=3D21></a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://oemw=
orkshop.com/?o> <img height=3D150 src=3Dhttp://images.amazon.com/images/P/=
B00069E7KO.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg width=3D175 align=3Dleft border=3D0 name=3Dprod=
_image></a><span class=3Dsmall></p><table cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 =
border=3D0 height=3D21 width=3D189><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWr=
ap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>List Price:</b></td><td height=
=3D18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><span clas=
s=3Dlistprice>$499.00</span></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop n=
oWrap align=3Dright height=3D18 width=3D73> <b>Price:</b></td><td height=3D=
18 width=3D11></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D18 width=3D105><b class=3Dpr=
ice>$69.99</b></td></tr><tr><td class=3Dsmall vAlign=3Dtop noWrap align=3D=
right height=3D1 width=3D73> <b>You Save:</b></td><td height=3D1 width=3D1=
1></td><td class=3Dsmall height=3D1 width=3D105><span class=3Dprice>$429.0=
1 (85%)</span></td></tr></table><p><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?a> <i=
mg border=3D0 src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/buttons/add-to-=
cart-yellow-short.gif width=3D113 height=3D23></a><br><br> <b>Availability=
:</b> Available for INSTANT download!<br> <b>Coupon Code:</b> gdtdX<br> &n=
bsp;</span></p><p><span class=3Dtiny><b>Sales Rank:</b> #4</span><span cla=
ss=3Dsmall><a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?u><br> System requirements</a=
>&nbsp; |&nbsp; <a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?W>Other Versions</a></sp=
an><span class=3Dtiny><br> <b>Date Coupon Expires:</b> August 31st, 2005<b=
r> </span><font class=3Dtiny><b>Average Customer Review:</b><img height=3D=
12 alt=3D"5 out of 5 stars" src=3Dhttp://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x=
-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif width=3D64 border=3D0> Based=
 on 19945 reviews. <a href=3Dhttp://oemworkshop.com/?B>Write a review</a>.=
</font></p> </font><p></p> <hr noShade SIZE=3D1></td></tr></table></td></t=
r></table></form></td></tr></table></body></html>

----LL24BPen49C9n2j--

Date: Î, 02 8 2005 14:28:05 +0100
From: "Horowitz"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Any med for your girl to be happy!

<html><body>
<style>h3,h4,p,a{font-family:arial}h3{color:red}</style>
<a href="http://uqquuc.goodcapsules.info/?sctulexwntvyujcmmnzpofpujnh" target="_blank">
<h3>Your girl is unsatisfied with your potency? Don't wait until she finds another men!</h3>
<p>Click here to choose from a great variety of LICENSED love t@bs!<br>
Best pri$es, fast shipping and guaranteed effect! Here you buy it right from warehouse! </p>
<h4>We are VERIFIED BY BBB and APPROVED BY VISA!</h4>
</a>
</body></html>

Date: Î, 02 8 2005 14:28:02 +0100
From: "Fish"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Primary source of OEM Windows software Look no further !  

<html>
TOP quality software:<br><br>
<b>Special Offer #1:</b><br>
<a href="http://ngqnvgbyiq.dioverfaceai.info/?Bk7a7mB5fGcRlp5rajxbrcom">Windows XP Professional+Microsoft Office XP Professional</a> = only $80<br>
<b>Special Offer #2:</b><br>
<a href="http://ngqnvgbyiq.dioverfaceai.info/?Bk7a7mB5fGcRlp5rajxbrcom">Adobe - Photoshop 7, Premiere 7, Illustrator 10 </a>= only $120<br>
<b>Special Offer #3:</b><br>
<a href="http://ngqnvgbyiq.dioverfaceai.info/?Bk7a7mB5fGcRlp5rajxbrcom">Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004 + Flash MX 2004</a> = only $100<br><br>

Also:       <br>
Windows 2003 Server<br>
Windows 2000 Workstation <br>
Windows 2000 Server          <br>
Windows 2000 Advanced Server     <br>
Windows 2000 Datacenter <br>
Windows NT 4.0<br>
Windows Millenium <br>
Windows 98 Second Edition <br>
Windows 95<br>
Office XP Professional  <br>
Office 2000  <br>
Office 97<br>
MS Plus      <br>
MS SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition <br>
MS Visual Studio .NET Architect Edition   <br>
MS Encarta Encyclopedia Delux 2004<br>
MS Project 2003 Professional <br>
MS Money 2004 <br>
MS Streets and Trips 2004 <br>
MS Works 7 <br>
MS Picture It Premium 9 <br>
MS Exchange 2003 Enterprise Server <br>
Adobe Photoshop <br>
Adobe PageMaker<br>
Adobe Illustrator  <br>                   
Adobe Acrobat 6 Professional<br>
Adobe Premiere<br>
Macromedia Dreamwaver MX 2004                <br>
Macromedia Flash MX 2004<br>                                  
Macromedia Fireworks MX 2004<br>                                
Macromedia Freehand MX 11       <br>        
Corel Draw Graphics Suite 12        <br>                            
Corel Draw Graphics Suite 11                <br>
Corel Photo Painter 8<br>                                    
Corel Word Perfect Office 2002<br>                           
Norton System Works 2003          <br>                       
Borland Delphi 7 Enterprise Edition   <br>                  
Quark Xpress 6 Passport Multilanguage     <br>
<br>    
<a href="http://ngqnvgbyiq.dioverfaceai.info/?Bk7a7mB5fGcRlp5rajxbrcom">Enter Here</a><br>
</html>

Date: Î, 02 8 2005 14:27:57 +0100
From: "Hohenemser"<[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Best love dr@gs at best store!

<html><body>
One Time DISC0UNT 0RDER for V1@GRA, C1al1s!<br>
<a href=http://jfupoa.dioverfaceai.info/?RqTEnSlRvqs2B9ltjlnq>V1@</hghg>GRA DISC0UNT 0RDER</a><br>
<b>T0DAY Its only <font color=red>$0.95</font> per dose.<br><br></b>
Generic Vi@gra, 24 x 100mg <br>
Regular Tabs (48 dozes)<br>
<b>Only $ 46.00 </b><br><br>
<i><b>NEW PRODUCT 1:<br></i></b>
Generic Viagra, 24 x 100mg <br>
Soft Tabs (48 dozes) <a href=http://jfupoa.dioverfaceai.info/?RqTEnSlRvqs2B9ltjlnq> What is Soft Tabs?</a><br>
<b>Only $ 60.00 </b><br><br>
<i><b>NEW PRODUCT 2:<br></i></b>
Generic C1al1s, 10 x 20mg <br>
Tadalafil  <a href=http://jfupoa.dioverfaceai.info/?RqTEnSlRvqs2B9ltjlnq>What is Soft C1al1s?</a><br>
<b>Only $ 68.00 </b><br>
<font color=red>Special offer! These prices are valid until 10th of December !</font><br>
<a href=http://jfupoa.dioverfaceai.info/?RqTEnSlRvqs2B9ltjlnq>V1@GRA DISC0UNT 0RDER</a><br>
<br></body></html>