: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Carrier Class Gateway
Why Waste time with calculations, It's an American Ship! Swing the 16 guns
and blow the Bridge. Bush can call it routine and not apologize for it.
-Original Message-
From: Pat Holden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April
Please tell me this is some joke about STD=standard that I'm simply
not getting...
Leslie.
Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Peter Deutsch wrote:
Errr, actually carriers don't have 16 guns, the battleships did. There
Arizona had (has?) 14 ones. At least, when I
Peter Deutsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, I'm surprised nobody's yet raised the issue of fragmenting the
payload in transit and the effect this will have on traffic throughput.
As modeled so far, this seems to be an interesting case where if you
reduce the size of the payload you
At 05:00 PM 4/26/01 -0700, Peter Deutsch wrote:
Willis, Scott L wrote:
Why Waste time with calculations, It's an American Ship! Swing the 16 guns
and blow the Bridge. Bush can call it routine and not apologize for it.
Errr, actually carriers don't have 16 guns, the battleships did. There
Peter Deutsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, I'm surprised nobody's yet raised the issue of fragmenting
the
payload in transit and the effect this will have on traffic throughput.
As modeled so far, this seems to be an interesting case where if you
reduce the size of the payload
I'm sure this is a stupid question (and I will probably get flamed for this email),
but what does this have to do with the IETF?
Ben Yalow wrote:
At 05:00 PM 4/26/01 -0700, Peter Deutsch wrote:
Willis, Scott L wrote:
Why Waste time with calculations, It's an American Ship! Swing the
Betsy,
I agree.
Please take the off-topic nonsense off the IETF list.
You are wasting my time.
Gene Gaines
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sterling, Virginia USA
On Friday, April 27, 2001, 5:10:59 PM, Betsy wrote:
I'm sure this is a stupid question (and I will probably get flamed for this email),
but
..
-Original Message-
From: Betsy Brennan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 5:11 PM
To: Ben Yalow
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Carrier Class Gateway
I'm sure this is a stupid question (and I will probably get flamed for this
email),
but what does this have
Something New - Welcome! Thank you Robert.
Betsy, your question was not stupid! I also lost some time deleting Carrier
Class Gateway email's. :/
j0rgeCarD0s0
:)
-Original Message-
From: Book, Robert
To: 'Betsy Brennan'; Ben Yalow
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 27-04-2001 22:09
Subject
M too!
M.
- Original Message -
From: Gene Gaines [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Betsy Brennan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Ben Yalow [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 4:46 P
Subject: Re[2]: Carrier Class Gateway
Betsy,
I agree.
Please take the off-topic
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Steven M. Be
llovin typed:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bill Manning writes:
semantically confused. why would sailors be on the
bridge? (the one over the canal)
Right -- they should be using routers, not bridges.
but there's only 7 seas - 802.1d
Bill wrote:
semantically confused. why would sailors be on the
bridge? (the one over the canal)
I guess you know the English expression
the best horseman is always on his feet.
The literal translation of its Dutch equivalent is:
the best helmsmen are ashore ...
Leen.
-Original Message-
From: Pat Holden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 5:13 PM
To: Jose Manuel Arronte Garcia; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lloyd Wood
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Carrier Class Gateway
one would have to consider high tides during a full
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Peter Deutsch wrote:
Errr, actually carriers don't have 16 guns, the battleships did. There
Arizona had (has?) 14 ones. At least, when I visited
Pearl Harbor a couple of years ago
Anyway, will this proposed protocol also apply to
STD carries over V* cannal ? :-)
The New Jersey is a Battleship not a Carrier. The carriers are bigger.
-Original Message-
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 8:41 PM
To: Matt Crawford
Cc: Vijay; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Carrier Class Gateway
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:44:25 CDT, Robert G. Ferrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
There's some discussion of Panama requirements in 'The New New Thing'.
Not just a lock, but there's a bridge to worry about; passing under it
at low tide is your height limit.
Ya know, if we wait long enough, I'll
what type of media do you propose to run ISBP over?
- Original Message -
From: Robert G. Ferrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: Carrier Class Gateway
And of *course*, you want the bridge and the ship
what type of media do you propose to run ISBP over?
Sailor-to-Sailor Relay, or maybe a specialized version of avian
carriers (RFC 1149 et al.) using albatrosses or seagulls.
RGF
Not just a lock, but there's a bridge to worry about; passing under it
at low tide is your height limit.
i would imagine the problem would be at high, not low, tide.
oops. mea culpa.
Not at all. On a trip between oceans, waiting less than 12 hours for
a favorable tide is probably
There's some discussion of Panama requirements in 'The New New
Thing'.
Not just a lock, but there's a bridge to worry about; passing under
it
at low tide is your height limit.
i would imagine the problem would be at high, not low, tide.
oops. mea culpa.
L.
Sorry to add yet
what type of media do you propose to run ISBP over?
Sailor-to-Sailor Relay
Relay? Sounds like a synchronous protocol, requiring heavy use of
real-time techniques such as semaphores --
http://www.anbg.gov.au/flags/semaphore.html
If it were truly carrier class it would have large
However, those of us who choose to use asynchronous protocols can
more easily make use of powerful, space saving message compression --
http://www.anbg.gov.au/flags/signal-meaning.html
If there is ever an IETF held at sea, I nominate the flag for
Y - I am carrying mails as a conference
Not on the bridge, the need to cross UNDER it...
M.
- Original Message -
From: Bill Manning [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Dawson, Peter D [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 2:25 P
Subject: Re: Carrier Class Gateway
semantically confused. why would
...
%
% --Original Message-
% -From: Pat Holden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
% -Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 2:05 PM
% -To: Robert G. Ferrell; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
% -Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
% -Subject: Re: Carrier Class Gateway
% -
% -
% -what type of media do you propose to run ISBP over
However, those of us who choose to use asynchronous protocols can
more easily make use of powerful, space saving message compression --
http://www.anbg.gov.au/flags/signal-meaning.html
If there is ever an IETF held at sea, I nominate the flag for
Y - I am carrying mails as a conference
This would a collision avoidance protocol. For example, measure maximum
height of the carrier class unit, compare to minimum height of the
terrestrial routed physical path bridge. If the CCU exceeds the TRPPB, it
must back off and wait until the next measurement cycle or until the
measurement
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bill Manning writes:
semantically confused. why would sailors be on the
bridge? (the one over the canal)
Right -- they should be using routers, not bridges.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Carrier Class Gateway
semantically confused. why would sailors be on the
bridge? (the one over the canal)
Or is this a case of ShipsIntheNight
%
% .dark fiber optics..based on Dense Wavelength
% Division Multiplexing.. layed 2 km below the surface
% of the sea... oh
its the sentsitive time to let it pass, with it is
higher tides...
Manuel Arronte.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Lloyd Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 1:44 P
Subject: RE: Carrier Class Gateway
There's some
However, those of us who choose to use asynchronous protocols can
more easily make use of powerful, space saving message compression --
http://www.anbg.gov.au/flags/signal-meaning.html
If there is ever an IETF held at sea, I nominate the flag for
Y - I am carrying mails as a
; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lloyd Wood
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Carrier Class Gateway
one would have to consider high tides during a full moon to get an accurate
measurement.
I am also sorry about this but...
I think all the calculation regarding height limit should be made based on
high tides
Oh, I don't know, the flag for G (I require a pilot) seems to
describe
us pretty well, also...
Are you trying to imply we're rudderless??!!!
No, no: Palm Pilots..
Maybe we could use 'A' (D(r)iver below, I am undergoing a speed trial) for
b@ke@ffs.
At 03:04 20.04.2001 -0500, Matt Crawford wrote:
Please suggest me place or a Document where i can get some information
about
Carrier Class Gateway.
There is no such thing. Neither the Panama Canal, the Suez Canal,
nor any other man-made waterway has locks large enough to accommodate
Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
taking the undefined from the tangential to the irrelevant:
http://www.pancanal.com/eng/photo/jersey-animation.html
Perhaps the USS New Jersey isn't modern.actually, I think a
lot of stuff is designed to panamax
Being able to use our warships in
Hi,
Please suggest me place or a Document
where i can get some information about
" Carrier Class Gateway".
thanks in Advance
Vijay
Please suggest me place or a Document where i can get some information about
" Carrier Class Gateway".
There is no such thing. Neither the Panama Canal, the Suez Canal,
nor any other man-made waterway has locks large enough to accommodate
a modern aircraft carrier.
36 matches
Mail list logo
