![nanog logo](/images/nanog-logo.png)
nanog mailing list archives
Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request]
From: Ross Tajvar <ross () tajvar io>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2019 18:30:34 -0500
Viruthagiri, You are being too defensive. You've made this discussion about whether or not someone is attacking you, rather than the merit of your idea. It is not about networking or mail anymore. Please end the conversation here. -Ross On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 6:26 PM Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan <giri () dombox org> wrote:
I don't know why you are all try to defend a man who try to silence my work. Are you saying this thread is necessary? On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 4:46 AM Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera () gmail com> wrote:On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 12:51 AM Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan <giri () dombox org> wrote:5 months back I posted my spam research on DMARC list. You have gone through only 50 words and judged my work. The whole thread gone haywire because of you. I was humiliated there and left.By the way, since that you've left no traces of whatever piece of work you've posted to that list. The website is empty, slides are removed from Speakerdeck, etc. In theory, I can easily recall a few cases in my life when going through just 50 words was quite enough for a judgment.To be very honest, I don't like you.Please keep our busy mailing list out of this information, though for me it's a valuable piece of data that someone I don't know personally doesn't like someone else.Although I don't like you, I still managed to respond politely in IETF lists. Again... In that list the only thing you did was attacking my work.So, I've read the whole thread, and, as far as I can see, there was nothing coming from John except for a balanced judgement.And then please tell me this man is not biased at all.Sorry, he's not. -- Töma-- Best Regards, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan Dombox, Inc.
Current thread:
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk..., (continued)
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... Miles Fidelman (Jan 14)
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... Bjørn Mork (Jan 15)
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... Stephen Satchell (Jan 15)
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... Tei (Jan 15)
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... James Downs (Jan 15)
- RE: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... Keith Medcalf (Jan 15)
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... Grant Taylor via NANOG (Jan 15)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan (Jan 12)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] valdis . kletnieks (Jan 12)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan (Jan 12)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Ross Tajvar (Jan 12)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan (Jan 12)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] valdis . kletnieks (Jan 12)
- Re: SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan (Jan 12)
- Re: SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan (Jan 13)
- Re: SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] William Anderson (Jan 14)
- Re: SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan (Jan 14)
- Re: SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan (Jan 14)