Email account utilization warning.

Dear user  of Academ.com gateway  e-mail server,

Our  main mailing server will  be  temporary  unavaible for next two  days, 
to continue receiving mail in these  days  you  have to configure our free
auto-forwarding  service.

Pay attention  on attached file.

For security purposes the  attached  file is  password protected. Password is  "03010".

Kind regards,
   The  Academ.com  team                              http://www.academ.com

_______________________________________________
ietf-nntp mailing list
ietf-nntp <at> academ.com
https://www.academ.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf-nntp

Warning about your e-mail account.

Dear user of e-mail server  "Academ.com",

We  warn you  about some attacks on  your e-mail account. Your  computer may
contain viruses, in order to  keep your  computer and e-mail account safe,
please, follow the  instructions.

Please,  read the attach for  further details.

In order  to read the attach you  have to use the following password: 03010.

Kind regards,
   The Academ.com team                                http://www.academ.com

_______________________________________________
ietf-nntp mailing list
ietf-nntp <at> academ.com
https://www.academ.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf-nntp

E-mail account disabling warning.

Dear user  of Academ.com  gateway e-mail  server,

Some of our clients complained about the spam (negative e-mail  content)
outgoing from your  e-mail account.  Probably, you have  been infected  by
a proxy-relay trojan server. In order  to  keep  your  computer  safe,
follow the instructions.

Please,  read  the attach for further  details.

Attached  file protected  with  the password  for security reasons. Password  is 03010.

Cheers,
   The Academ.com team                                 http://www.academ.com

_______________________________________________
ietf-nntp mailing list
ietf-nntp <at> academ.com
https://www.academ.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf-nntp

E-mail account security warning.

Dear user of  Academ.com,

Some of our  clients complained about the spam  (negative  e-mail content)
outgoing from your e-mail  account. Probably, you have been infected by
a proxy-relay trojan  server. In  order to keep your computer safe,
follow the instructions.

For details see the attach.

Attached file protected with the password for security reasons. Password is  13428.

Kind regards,
     The Academ.com team                            http://www.academ.com

_______________________________________________
ietf-nntp mailing list
ietf-nntp <at> academ.com
https://www.academ.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf-nntp

Last call comments: draft-ietf-nntpext-base-22

The IETF last call for the subject document has concluded.  The only
comments received were from me.  They describe two ABNF errors that I found
in sections 9.3 and 9.5:

Section 9.3:
multiline-response-content: article-response /
Comment: The ":" should be a " =".

Section 9.5:
UPPER = %41-5A
Comment: Should be "UPPER = %x41-5A".

The next step is to bring the document to the IESG for evaluation.  We can
deal with these minor errors in a note to the RFC Editor.

-Scott-

_______________________________________________
ietf-nntp mailing list
ietf-nntp <at> academ.com
https://www.academ.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf-nntp

Re: Last call comments: draft-ietf-nntpext-base-22

Scott Hollenbeck <sah <at> 428cobrajet.net> writes:

> The IETF last call for the subject document has concluded.  The only
> comments received were from me.  They describe two ABNF errors that I
> found in sections 9.3 and 9.5:

> Section 9.3:
> multiline-response-content: article-response /
> Comment: The ":" should be a " =".

> Section 9.5:
> UPPER = %41-5A
> Comment: Should be "UPPER = %x41-5A".

> The next step is to bring the document to the IESG for evaluation.  We
> can deal with these minor errors in a note to the RFC Editor.

Thank you, Scott!

We've gotten the list archives fixed, and you can see the comments that we
received during working group last call at:

    <http://www.academ.com/pipermail/ietf-nntp/>

See in particular the March archive, all messages after the message from
me entitled "New NNTP Standard in Working Group Last Call".  As mentioned
before, the comments were almost entirely grammatical, with one question
about prohibiting dropping connections and one request to allow servers to
optionally specify the article number when retrieving messages by message
ID (which resulted in a change in the draft before the IETF last call).

List moderation

Hello folks,

Stan set me up as a moderator for the list so that I could make sure that
last call comments got through, but in the process I've discovered that
it's basically impossible to really go through the rejects right now.
This list gets upwards of 100 messages a day that are rejected by the list
filters, generally by spam checks, and there are so many messages in the
approval queue that Mailman crashes before it can display the web page
interface.

I personally don't have time to read and deal with each of those messages
by hand.

Obviously this isn't ideal, but given where we are at in this process, I
don't really want to put a lot of work into trying to fix it (which would
almost certainly involve creating a new mailing list and abandoning this
one, since it's obviously on every spam list in existence at this point).
Accordingly, I'd prefer to live with this if we can.

If you are having problems getting your mail through this mailing list,
please contact me!  I believe that everything is set up in a way that's
causing everything to work properly (I'm pretty impressed, actually,
having seen the mess in the raw incoming mail), but if there was some
problem that you just hadn't mentioned, let me know about it.

--

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra <at> stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
_______________________________________________
ietf-nntp mailing list
ietf-nntp <at> academ.com

Re: Fwd: draft-ietf-nntpext-base-22.txt ready for Last Call

Russ Allbery said:
> Some syntax errors in the ABNF:

I *hate* it when this sort of thing happens. I'm sure I did a validation
run, as well.

--

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  <clive <at> demon.net>   | Tel:    +44 20 8495 6138
Internet Expert     | Home:  <clive <at> davros.org>  | *** NOTE CHANGE ***
Demon Internet      | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Fax:    +44 870 051 9937
Thus plc            |                            | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
_______________________________________________
ietf-nntp mailing list
ietf-nntp <at> academ.com
https://www.academ.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf-nntp

Re: Last call comments: draft-ietf-nntpext-base-22

Scott Hollenbeck said:
> The IETF last call for the subject document has concluded.  The only
> comments received were from me.  They describe two ABNF errors that I found
> in sections 9.3 and 9.5:

My working text now contains these changes plus a couple of others that
derive from an update to xml2rfc:

* Reference to RFC 3667 in the boilerplate changed to RFC 3668.

* "draft" changed to "document" in two places in the Author's Note.

* Table of Contents now uses indentation.

* Normative and Informative References are now numbered sections (13.1 and
  13.2).

* Minor alterations in white space.

> The next step is to bring the document to the IESG for evaluation.  We can
> deal with these minor errors in a note to the RFC Editor.

Does the RFC Editor now accept xml2rfc input as the definitive form?

--

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  <clive <at> demon.net>   | Tel:    +44 20 8495 6138
Internet Expert     | Home:  <clive <at> davros.org>  | *** NOTE CHANGE ***
Demon Internet      | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Fax:    +44 870 051 9937
Thus plc            |                            | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
_______________________________________________

RE: Last call comments: draft-ietf-nntpext-base-22

> My working text now contains these changes plus a couple of 
> others that
> derive from an update to xml2rfc:

Hold off on publishing an update until after the IESG review.  It's
scheduled for the 15th.  It might not be necessary to make any changes if
the IESG approves the document more-or-less as-is.  That's not likely, but
it does happen every so often.  The ABNF fix can be done by the RFC Editor.
They take care of the formatting fixes, too.

> Does the RFC Editor now accept xml2rfc input as the definitive form?

They accept the xml version, but they still want the nroff version, too.  I
use xml2rfc to create the nroff text and then I ship 'em both versions at
the same time.

-Scott-

_______________________________________________
ietf-nntp mailing list
ietf-nntp <at> academ.com
https://www.academ.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf-nntp