past vs future use
Jon Lewis
jlewis at inorganic5.fdt.net
Sat Jun 28 15:49:40 EDT 1997
- Previous message: past vs future use
- Next message: past vs future use
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Sat, 28 Jun 1997, Jeff Williams wrote: > I have to agree with Jon's assesment here. It would seeme exactly > so that if an ISP is multihomed and completley using at least a Unfortunately, if you read a little more carefully (I missed it when skimming the rfc before, but Mr. Cook pointed it out) section 3 doesn't seem to apply to ISPs at all. We get shafted in section 2. Section 3 is for large organizations not giving IP's out to others...not a fitting description of most ISPs. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Jon Lewis <jlewis at fdt.net> | Unsolicited commercial e-mail will Network Administrator | be proof-read for $199/message. Florida Digital Turnpike | ________Finger jlewis at inorganic5.fdt.net for PGP public key_______
- Previous message: past vs future use
- Next message: past vs future use
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the NAIPR mailing list