Who is pagans at texoma.net

[Valdis.Kletnieks at VT.EDU]

On Thu, 03 Jul 1997 13:00:33 CDT, Larry Vaden said:
> It is our goal, by offering these principles, to begin a discussion
> regarding allocation of routable CIDR IP blocks for use by small and
> moderate sized ISPs.
> 
> Your participation is important and is requested.

Aren't there already mailing lists for this?

I'll overlook the fact that you have a number of "it is generally recognized"
statements that are, in fact, *not* generally recognized, and subject to
dispute.  In particular, I found principle number 3 a bit hard to swallow,
given that InterNIC, APNIC, and RIPE were all (the last I heard) using
essentially the same criteria.

In fact, said "same criteria" caused a large flamefest on the NAIPR list 
around Feb 6, where the whole hangup was that I (and a number of other
people) mistakenly thought RFC2050 was the entire list of criteria.
RIPE also uses RIPE-140 and a few other documents, and Scott Bradner
(I think it was Scott, anyhow) informed me that InterNIC and APNIC used
pretty much the same additional criteria.

Having said that, I don't think I'll be joining the mailing list if
you can't quantify the difference in criteria, and how it "unfairly
discriminates".
-- 
				Valdis Kletnieks
				Computer Systems Senior Engineer
				Virginia Tech


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 284 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/naipr/attachments/19970703/8dc7076d/attachment.sig>