I think Bill's point was that if a distributed database is required to
contain routing policy, why not use existing distributed database
infrastructure to host it (i.e. the DNS). In this context, deployment
of LDAP-accessible databases (which you advocate) is replicating the
DNS (which you
on 3/5/2003 8:58 PM Joe Abley wrote:
I think Bill's point was that if a distributed database is required to
contain routing policy, why not use existing distributed database
infrastructure to host it (i.e. the DNS).
I think it is fair to say that the delegation chain in the DNS is
We are looking at setting up a regional office in Mumbai and need E1 connectivity to the Internet.
Any recommendations on an ISP?
If you have further information on pricing, peering, services or support it would be greatly appreciated.
tks
Some comments, after reading the draft:
Under 2.1, Form of Practice, where you finally talk about what it is
you're propsing:
The withdrawal of IR (use of blocklists, cancellation of routing,
withdrawal of IP addresses and domain names) may in its early months of
adoption split the Internet
Hi, Jeroen.
On Thu, 27 Feb 2003, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Is it _finally_ possible then, to get a record as glue into
the com/net/org zones?
Yes, since RRP 2.0 (the protocol used by ICANN-accredited registrars
to register com/net domains with VeriSign Global Registry Services)
was deployed
If anyone is having trouble getting a hold of your folks in 60 Hudson, word
is there was an electrical fire in the basement and the building was
evacuated.
--
Jeffrey Meltzer
ICS/VillageWorld
631-218-0700 x100
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Does any one on the list have a technical/routing contact for these guys? I stumbled
across a routing loop while trying to access theregister.co.uk and I'd like to let
them know.
22 fe-1-4-03-ed1.ixsolutions.net (195.188.19.242) 217.896 ms *
Interested parties are invited to provide comments to correct, elaborate
or perfect my proposal, abstracted below, which I plan to offer as an
Internet Draft momentarily. It relates to the activities of ISPs
and backbones intimately.
Comments or objections to the effect This is going to be
Thank you Andy for making my points so clearly. See inline
comments
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:30:11 -0500 (EST), Andy Dills wrote:
Some comments, after reading the draft:
Under 2.1, Form of Practice, where you finally talk about what it is
you're propsing:
The withdrawal of IR (use of blocklists,
Thank you Josh, please see inline comments which let me clarify points
On Thu, 06 Mar 2003 13:17:35 -0500, Joshua Smith wrote:
is there a forthcoming section on criterium for demonstrating reformation
by the sp and/or 'offending' user?
The criterion is stated: no more complaints
the
building on andy's comments:
is there a forthcoming section on criterium for demonstrating reformation
by the sp and/or 'offending' user? without it, you will leave it up to
individuals, which will cause inconsistancies.
the proposal does not take in to account the global differences in sp
11 matches
Mail list logo
