On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 07:36:45PM -0700, David Ford wrote:
> > > 'Technology Push' argument - and it shouldn't be that hard. Write some
> > > articles on how Linux is innovating, and how Cisco and others are standing
> > > in the way of progress.
> >
> > Cisco are already acting on this issue.
> Cisco are already acting on this issue. No point clobbering them
They sent this to l-k some day ago:
this is marked as cisco bug id CSCds23698.
(see http://www.cisco.com/cgi-bin/Support/Bugtool/onebug.pl?bugid=CSCds23698)
Bud ID:CSCds23698
Headline: PIX sends RSET in
Cisco are already acting on this issue. No point clobbering them
They sent this to l-k some day ago:
this is marked as cisco bug id CSCds23698.
(see http://www.cisco.com/cgi-bin/Support/Bugtool/onebug.pl?bugid=CSCds23698)
Bud ID:CSCds23698
Headline: PIX sends RSET in
On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 07:36:45PM -0700, David Ford wrote:
'Technology Push' argument - and it shouldn't be that hard. Write some
articles on how Linux is innovating, and how Cisco and others are standing
in the way of progress.
Cisco are already acting on this issue. No point
Alan Cox wrote:
> > 'Technology Push' argument - and it shouldn't be that hard. Write some
> > articles on how Linux is innovating, and how Cisco and others are standing
> > in the way of progress.
>
> Cisco are already acting on this issue. No point clobbering them
>
> Alan
AFAIK, Cisco has
On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 08:56:51PM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, bert hubert wrote:
[snip]
> >Well, I think that we need to make some kind of PR push about ECN. Linux
> >right now has enough clout and respect to be able to be used as a
> >'Technology Push' argument - and it
> 'Technology Push' argument - and it shouldn't be that hard. Write some
> articles on how Linux is innovating, and how Cisco and others are standing
> in the way of progress.
Cisco are already acting on this issue. No point clobbering them
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, bert hubert wrote:
>> > In other words, being able to just turn on ECN for localhost and your
>> > internal network isn't likely to be terribly useful.
>>
>> Being able to turn ECN on/off for specific routes would be very
>> useful. Currently we have to turn ECN off for
On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 01:43:09PM +0100, Mike Jagdis wrote:
> > In other words, being able to just turn on ECN for localhost and your
> > internal network isn't likely to be terribly useful.
>
> Being able to turn ECN on/off for specific routes would be very
> useful. Currently we have to turn
On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 01:43:09PM +0100, Mike Jagdis wrote:
In other words, being able to just turn on ECN for localhost and your
internal network isn't likely to be terribly useful.
Being able to turn ECN on/off for specific routes would be very
useful. Currently we have to turn ECN
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, bert hubert wrote:
In other words, being able to just turn on ECN for localhost and your
internal network isn't likely to be terribly useful.
Being able to turn ECN on/off for specific routes would be very
useful. Currently we have to turn ECN off for systems
'Technology Push' argument - and it shouldn't be that hard. Write some
articles on how Linux is innovating, and how Cisco and others are standing
in the way of progress.
Cisco are already acting on this issue. No point clobbering them
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 08:56:51PM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, bert hubert wrote:
[snip]
Well, I think that we need to make some kind of PR push about ECN. Linux
right now has enough clout and respect to be able to be used as a
'Technology Push' argument - and it
Alan Cox wrote:
'Technology Push' argument - and it shouldn't be that hard. Write some
articles on how Linux is innovating, and how Cisco and others are standing
in the way of progress.
Cisco are already acting on this issue. No point clobbering them
Alan
AFAIK, Cisco has already
14 matches
Mail list logo
