gmane.ietf.rmt archive

761 archived articles, newest first (page 8 of 8). Latest articles →

Re: NORM BB & PI naming
Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:48:00 +0200
"Sami Peltotalo" <[email protected]> • #547
Re: NORM BB & PI naming
Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:31:03 -0500
Brian Adamson <[email protected]> • #546
NORM BB & PI naming
Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:43:45 +0200
<[email protected]> • #545
RE: Re: Authors on draft-ietf-rmt-bb-lct-revised-01
Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:32:59 +0200
<[email protected]> • #544
Re: Authors on draft-ietf-rmt-bb-lct-revised-01
Mon, 20 Feb 2006 16:39:59 +0000
Lorenzo Vicisano <[email protected]> • #543
Re: Authors on draft-ietf-rmt-bb-lct-revised-01
Mon, 20 Feb 2006 08:28:37 -0800
Allison Mankin <[email protected]> • #542
Authors on draft-ietf-rmt-bb-lct-revised-01
Mon, 20 Feb 2006 10:32:20 +0200
<[email protected]> • #541
any outstanding issue with draft-ietf-rmt-fec-bb-revised-03 ?
Fri, 17 Feb 2006 18:32:18 +0000
Lorenzo Vicisano <[email protected]> • #540
[[email protected]: Approval to Post Version -00 Internet-Drafts for the 65th IETF Meeting in Dallas, TX, USA]
Fri, 17 Feb 2006 18:00:39 +0000
Lorenzo Vicisano <[email protected]> • #539
WEBRC undefined variable
Fri, 17 Feb 2006 16:27:12 +0100
Vincent Lucas <[email protected]> • #538
Re: [MMUSIC] Re: SDP descriptors for ALC
Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:39:16 +0000
Colin Perkins <[email protected]> • #537
RE: Re: [Rmt] SDP descriptors for ALC
Tue, 7 Feb 2006 17:41:04 +0200
[email protected] • #536
RE: EXT_TIME: a new HE for timing information in LCT
Mon, 6 Feb 2006 15:23:50 +0200
[email protected] • #535
Re: [Rmt] SDP descriptors for ALC
Mon, 06 Feb 2006 10:46:32 +0100
Magnus Westerlund <[email protected]> • #534
RE: EXT_TIME: a new HE for timing information in LCT
Mon, 6 Feb 2006 10:26:48 +0200
[email protected] • #533
RE: EXT_TIME: a new HE for timing information in LCT
Fri, 3 Feb 2006 13:03:19 -0500
"Mark Watson" <[email protected]> • #532
RE: EXT_TIME: a new HE for timing information in LCT
Fri, 3 Feb 2006 14:50:27 +0200
[email protected] • #531
RE: EXT_TIME: a new HE for timing information in LCT
Fri, 3 Feb 2006 14:50:27 +0200
[email protected] • #530
Re: EXT_TIME: a new HE for timing information in LCT
Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:21:51 +0100
Vincent Roca <[email protected]> • #529
RE: EXT_TIME: a new HE for timing information in LCT
Wed, 1 Feb 2006 11:34:44 -0500
"Mark Watson" <[email protected]> • #528
RE: EXT_TIME: a new HE for timing information in LCT
Wed, 1 Feb 2006 12:38:18 +0100
"Thorsten Lohmar \(AC/EDD\)" <[email protected]> • #527
RE: EXT_TIME: a new HE for timing information in LCT
Wed, 1 Feb 2006 13:06:22 +0200
[email protected] • #526
EXT_TIME: a new HE for timing information in LCT
Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:17:35 +0100
Vincent Roca <[email protected]> • #525
RE: I-D ACTION:draft-mehta-rmt-flute-sdp-05.txt
Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:34:30 +0200
[email protected] • #524
RE: [Rmt] SDP descriptors for ALC
Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:17:05 +0200
[email protected] • #523
I-D ACTION:draft-mehta-rmt-flute-sdp-05.txt
Tue, 31 Jan 2006 11:57:52 +0200
[email protected] • #522
I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-rmt-fec-bb-revised-03.txt
Mon, 30 Jan 2006 15:50:02 -0500
[email protected] • #521
SDP descriptors for ALC
Mon, 30 Jan 2006 17:33:42 +0200
[email protected] • #520
draft-ietf-rmt-bb-lct-revised-01 and draft-ietf-rmt-fec-bb-revised-03
Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:49:05 -0500
"Mark Watson" <[email protected]> • #519
Re: How is the FEC instance ID field in the EXT_FTI headerdefined?
Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:14:53 +0000 GMT
[email protected] • #518
Re: How is the FEC instance ID field in the EXT_FTI headerdefined?
Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:33:43 +0100
Magnus Westerlund <[email protected]> • #517
RE: How is the FEC instance ID field in the EXT_FTI headerdefined?
Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:45:13 -0500
"Mark Watson" <[email protected]> • #516
RE: draft-ietf-rmt-bb-lct-revised-01 isdraft-ietf-rmt-pi-alc-revised-01
Wed, 18 Jan 2006 09:39:48 -0500
"Mark Watson" <[email protected]> • #515
How is the FEC instance ID field in the EXT_FTI header defined?
Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:25:02 +0100
Magnus Westerlund <[email protected]> • #514
draft-ietf-rmt-bb-lct-revised-01 is draft-ietf-rmt-pi-alc-revised-01
Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:08:57 +0100
Magnus Westerlund <[email protected]> • #513
[EXP2STD] FLUTE revised -01
Mon, 9 Jan 2006 02:00:07 +0200
[email protected] • #512
Re: FEC ID allocation
Wed, 4 Jan 2006 19:42:02 -0800
Lorenzo Vicisano <[email protected]> • #511
I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-rmt-flute-revised-01.txt
Tue, 03 Jan 2006 15:50:01 -0500
[email protected] • #510
RE: New HE for timing information, including SCT/ERT
Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:57:47 +0100
"Thorsten Lohmar \(AC/EDD\)" <[email protected]> • #509
RE: [MMUSIC] FW: New Version Notification - draft-mehta-rmt-flute-sdp-04.txt
Tue, 13 Dec 2005 17:06:10 +0200
[email protected] • #508
RE: New HE for timing information, including SCT/ERT
Tue, 13 Dec 2005 16:32:46 +0200
[email protected] • #507
RE: New HE for timing information, including SCT/ERT
Tue, 13 Dec 2005 16:27:14 +0200
[email protected] • #506
RE: Should FLUTE File Aggregation I-D be a working group item?
Tue, 13 Dec 2005 16:22:42 +0200
[email protected] • #505
Re: RE: New HE for timing information, including SCT/ERT
Tue, 13 Dec 2005 10:15:42 +0100
Vincent Roca <[email protected]> • #504
RE: New HE for timing information, including SCT/ERT
Mon, 12 Dec 2005 19:25:57 -0500
"Mark Watson" <[email protected]> • #503
New HE for timing information, including SCT/ERT
Mon, 12 Dec 2005 09:55:41 +0100
Vincent Roca <[email protected]> • #502
RE: Should FLUTE File Aggregation I-D be a working group item?
Fri, 9 Dec 2005 12:57:05 -0500
"Mark Watson" <[email protected]> • #501
RE: Should FLUTE File Aggregation I-D be a working group item?
Fri, 9 Dec 2005 03:02:26 -0800
"Michael Luby" <[email protected]> • #500
RE: Should FLUTE File Aggregation I-D be a working group item?
Fri, 9 Dec 2005 12:23:26 +0200
[email protected] • #499
RE: FEC Encoding ID allocation
Fri, 9 Dec 2005 12:18:39 +0200
[email protected] • #498
FEC Encoding ID allocation
Thu, 8 Dec 2005 08:39:14 -0800
"Michael Luby" <[email protected]> • #497
RE: Should FLUTE File Aggregation I-D be a working group item?
Thu, 8 Dec 2005 07:44:21 -0800
"Michael Luby" <[email protected]> • #496
RE: Should FLUTE File Aggregation I-D be a working group item?
Thu, 8 Dec 2005 17:09:56 +0200
[email protected] • #495
Re: Should FLUTE File Aggregation I-D be a working group item?
Mon, 5 Dec 2005 23:31:33 +0100
Christoph Neumann <[email protected]> • #494
Re: FEC ID allocation
Fri, 02 Dec 2005 15:30:35 +0100
Magnus Westerlund <[email protected]> • #493
RE: Should FLUTE File Aggregation I-D be a working group item?
Fri, 2 Dec 2005 12:43:37 +0200
[email protected] • #492
RE: FEC ID allocation
Fri, 2 Dec 2005 12:24:56 +0200
[email protected] • #491
RE: Should FLUTE File Aggregation I-D be a working group item?
Wed, 30 Nov 2005 19:39:55 -0500
"Mark Watson" <[email protected]> • #490
RE: FEC ID allocation
Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:32:39 -0800
"Michael Luby" <[email protected]> • #489
uniform disclaimer for moving specs to Standard Track
Tue, 29 Nov 2005 11:44:08 -0800
Lorenzo Vicisano <[email protected]> • #488
Re: FEC ID allocation
Tue, 29 Nov 2005 11:17:19 -0800
Lorenzo Vicisano <[email protected]> • #487
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.