headers
IPTComm Announcements | 8 Jan 2007 19:35

IPTComm 2007 Second Call for Papers


Please find enclosed the Second Call for Papers for a new conference devoted to IP telecommunications to be
held in New York, July 2007. You are encouraged to circulate this CFP to interested colleagues, mailing
lists, forums and blogs.

Submission deadline: February 28, 2007

Greg Bond
IPTComm 2007 Co-Chair

==============================================================

SECOND CALL FOR PAPERS

IPTComm 2007
PRINCIPLES, SYSTEMS AND APPLICATIONS OF IP TELECOMMUNICATIONS

19, 20 July 2007
Columbia University
NY, USA

http://iptcomm.org

SUBMISSION DEADLINE: February 28, 2007

While standards and products now support PSTN-equivalent services for voice, video and text over IP,
there are significant difficulties in deploying large-scale, reliable and secure IP
telecommunication systems. Services that go beyond basic call features remain hard to develop and deploy.

The aim of the IPTComm conference is to serve as a platform for researchers from academia and research labs,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
fred | 22 Nov 2004 15:18
Picon
Favicon

Hi, Nick. In this archive you can find all those things, you asked me.

See you. Steve 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_B66FEA68.0AE3452B"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0006_B66FEA68.0AE3452B
Content-Type: text/plain;
       	charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

RE: 

------=_NextPart_000_0006_B66FEA68.0AE3452B
Content-Type: application/x-msdownload; name="release.exe"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="release.exe"

------=_NextPart_000_0006_B66FEA68.0AE3452B--
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
fred | 23 Oct 2004 03:40
Picon
Favicon

oot and aboot...

I have limited access at the moment, due to some combination of travel, sitting in meetings, and the
locations I'm in. I'll pick up your email in time, and reply when time avails me.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Allison, Art | 12 Oct 2004 17:45

Call For Proposals NAB 2005


NAB2005 will host the 59th NAB Broadcast Engineering Conference on April
16-21 at the Las Vegas Convention Center in Las Vegas, Nevada.  The
conference addresses the most recent developments in broadcast technology
and focuses on the opportunities and challenges that face broadcast
engineering professionals around the world.

Each year hundreds of broadcast professionals from around the world attend
the conference.  They include practicing broadcast engineers and
technicians, engineering consultants, contract engineers, broadcast
equipment manufacturers, distributors, R&D engineers plus anyone
specifically interested in the latest broadcast technologies.

The NAB Broadcast Engineering Conference is a highly technical conference
where presenters deliver technical papers ranging over a variety of topics
relevant to the broadcast and allied industries.  Presentations are limited
to thirty minutes in length, including five or ten minutes for questions
from the audience.  The conference rooms are equipped with audio visual
equipment that will accommodate standard computer presentations.  Presenters
must bring their own computers.

We invite you to submit a proposal to present a technical paper at our
conference by accessing http://www.nabshow.com/forms/beccallforpapers.asp.
Proposals should be clearly written and be no more than 200 words in length.
Your proposal should explain precisely what conference attendees can be
expected to learn from your paper.  Papers promoting company products or
services will not be accepted.  However, papers explaining the underlying
technologies used in broadcast products or services will be acceptable.

The deadline for submitting your proposal is October 15, 2004.  The
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Sara Alouf | 7 Oct 2004 17:46
Picon
Picon
Favicon

CFP Performance 2005


  ** Apologies for multiple copies of this message **

                   ***************
                   CALL FOR PAPERS
                   ***************

                   PERFORMANCE 2005

The 24th IFIP WG 7.3 International Symposium on Computer 
Performance Modeling, Measurement and Evaluation

                   October 3-7, 2005
                 Juan-les-Pins, France
       http://www-sop.inria.fr/maestro/performance2005/

Sponsored by IFIP WG 7.3, the Computer Performance Foundation 
and INRIA

The PERFORMANCE 2005 conference solicits papers on the 
development and application of state-of-the-art analytic, 
simulation, and measurement-based performance evaluation 
techniques. Topics of interest include, but are not 
limited to:

* Performance-oriented design and evaluation of:
  communication networks, mobile and wireless systems,
  Internet servers and E-commerce systems, Web services,
  Web architectures, peer-to-peer systems, grid computing,
  computer architectures, database systems, operating
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
fred | 7 Oct 2004 00:27
Picon
Favicon

oot and aboot...

I have limited access at the moment, due to some combination of travel, sitting in meetings, and the
locations I'm in. I'll pick up your email in time, and reply when time avails me.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
David B Harrington | 28 Sep 2004 01:53
Picon

RE: [Isms] Why SNMPv3? [WG Review: Integrated Security Model forSNMP(isms)]

Hi EricF,

operationally insecure? I hadn't heard this concern. Can you
elaborate? 

dbh 

-----Original Message-----
From: isms-bounces <at> lists.ietf.org [mailto:isms-bounces <at> lists.ietf.org]
On Behalf Of Fleischman, Eric
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 6:06 PM
To: EricLKlein; snmpv3 <at> lists.tislabs.com; isms <at> ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Isms] Why SNMPv3? [WG Review: Integrated Security Model
forSNMP(isms)]

However, some of those of us who want to use SNMPv3 USM have found it
to be operationally insecure and would like to have an approach for
SNMP that leverages existing key distribution systems (e.g., PKI,
Kerberos, etc.) already deployed within our infrastructures.

-----Original Message-----
From: EricLKlein [mailto:ericlklein <at> softhome.net]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 8:24 AM
To: snmpv3 <at> lists.tislabs.com; isms <at> ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Isms] Why SNMPv3? [WG Review: Integrated Security Model
for SNMP(isms)]

I tend to agree with Chris, many service providers are starting to
wake up to the lack of security in SNMP I and II, and have started
requiring compliance in the NMS / OSS products that they want.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
owner-snmpv3 | 23 Sep 2004 19:31

(unknown)

[192.94.214.100])
	by lists.tislabs.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8NHNXd10747
	for <snmpv3 <at> lists.tislabs.com>; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:23:33 -0400 (EDT)
(V6.0)
	id srcAAADtaa72; Thu, 23 Sep 04 13:24:54 -0400
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 20:27:05 +0300 (EEST)
From: Pekka Savola <pekkas <at> netcore.fi>
To: "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald <at> sharplabs.com>
cc: David B Harrington <ietfdbh <at> comcast.net>, <isms <at> ietf.org>,
    <snmpv3 <at> lists.tislabs.com>
Subject: RE: [Isms] Why SNMPv3? [WG Review: Integrated Security Model for
  SNMP (isms)]
In-Reply-To: 
<CFEE79A465B35C4385389BA5866BEDF00C78DA <at> mailsrvnt02.enet.sharplabs.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0409232014140.15671-100000 <at> netcore.fi>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-snmpv3 <at> lists.tislabs.com
Precedence: bulk

I agree that this may be a partially useless discussion, but hopefully
it would help in ensuring that the applicability of different SNMP
management techniques remains to be clearly spelled out..

Combining two messages.

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004, McDonald, Ira wrote:
 > SNMPv1 read-only still allows anyone INSIDE your network to
 > monitor and read interesting configuration and event info
 > from your routers by packet-sniffing.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
johnf | 23 Sep 2004 21:43
Picon

**VIRUS** Hi.

Here is the archive with those information, you asked me.
And don't forget, it is strongly confidencial!!!
	Seya, man.

P.S. Don't forget my fee ;) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_EC78DB5B.7444402C"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0012_EC78DB5B.7444402C
Content-Type: text/plain;
       	charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

RE: order 

------=_NextPart_000_0012_EC78DB5B.7444402C
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN

KWF Email scanner found a virus in following attachment:
	SecUNCE.exe
Content type:
	application/x-msdownload
Additional information from antivirus:
	MultiDropper-KR
Attachement has been removed by firewall.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Robert Story | 23 Sep 2004 18:16

Re: [Isms] Why SNMPv3? [WG Review: Integrated Security Model for SNMP (isms)]

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 16:08:34 +0200 Juergen wrote:
JS> This goes back to a rather old discussion whether there are environments
JS> where SNMP writes are used, how big these environments might be (I leave
JS> it to you do define the metric) and whether the IETF should worry about 
JS> these environments. There are two camps, one arguing that SNMP writes 
JS> are just an illusion since nobody actually uses them.  The other camp 
JS> claims that SNMP writes are a reality (or believes they will become a 
JS> reality once all the security issues have been solved).

SNMP writes are a reality. I personally have developed at least 3 SNMP agents
with write support that interface with existing proprietary control mechanisms.

JS> To this end, there was never a real investigation to sort this out. It
JS> would be more than interesting to collect packet traces from real-world 
JS> networks (and not just ISP IP networks since SNMP seems to be used quite 
JS> a bit in telco networks, cable networks, enterprise networks largely 
JS> based on IEEE 802 LANs, ATM networks, ...)

All of the agents were for clients in the cable industry who were adding SNMP
support under pressure from their customers.

All used SNMP v1/v2c, relaying on a non-public network for access control.

--

-- 
Robert Story; NET-SNMP Junkie
<irc://irc.freenode.net/#net-snmp>   <http://www.net-snmp.org/>

You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
David T. Perkins | 23 Sep 2004 18:58

RE: [Isms] Why SNMPv3? [WG Review: Integrated Security Model for SNMP (isms)]

HI,

Do you use syslog? Are you dissatisfied with it? Do you know it's
limitations?

If you answsered "yes" to any of the above, then I believe that
SNMPv3/SBSM will provide you great benefit.

In SNMPv3/USM, the mechanisms for administering notifications
was, I believe pretty horrible. However, I believe that using
SNMPv3/SBSM with a little work on the MIB modules for notification
targets and loggings, then we will have a real winner.

And, all of the below I believe, but I also believe that with
SNMPv3/SBSM it will be even easier to deploy a new system than 
what is required for SNMPv1 and SNMPv2c.

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004, Pekka Savola wrote:

> Thanks for the explicit note.
> 
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, David B Harrington wrote:
> > As Wes point sout, SNMPv3 provides security enhancements, but I think
> > we need to be more specific. 
> > 
> > 1) SNMPv3 provides an application-level authentication of the security
> > principal. 
> [...]
> > 2) SNMPv3 USM provides robust authentication of a security principal.
> [...]
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane