When did this become slashdot?
about 1996
randy
To all
I received yesterday morning from Mr. Montaigne Marcelin, Director of
Conatel the aid that has been given by Codetel to help the technicians in
the Telecommunications sector:
1. 9 packs of rice 60 Kg
2. 2 packs of beans 60 Kg
3. 2 containers of oil 30 pounds each
4. 4 herring
On 1/24/10 7:48 AM, Damian Menscher wrote:
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Gadi Evrong...@linuxbox.org wrote:
On 1/24/10 6:37 AM, Damian Menscher wrote:
So... you're taking incomplete information hyped up by tech
reporters operating based on leaks from people tangential to an
investigation
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 22:04:31 CST, Larry Sheldon said:
I remember a day when 18 was the largest number of computers that would
ever be needed.
First off, it was 5, not 18. :)
Second, there's not much evidence that TJ Watson actually said it.
On 1/24/2010 10:03 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 22:04:31 CST, Larry Sheldon said:
I remember a day when 18 was the largest number of computers that would
ever be needed.
First off, it was 5, not 18. :)
Second, there's not much evidence that TJ Watson actually said
On Jan 23, 2010, at 8:04 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
On 1/23/2010 9:47 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
64 bits is enough networks that if each network was an almond MM,
you would be able to fill all of the great lakes with MMs before you
ran out of /64s.
Did somebody once say something like that
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 08:57:17 -0800
Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Jan 23, 2010, at 8:04 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
On 1/23/2010 9:47 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
64 bits is enough networks that if each network was an almond MM,
you would be able to fill all of the great lakes with
On Jan 24, 2010, at 4:45 PM, Mark Smith wrote:
Actually, from what Christian Huitema says in his IPv6: The New
Internet Protocol book, the original IPv6 address size was 64 bits,
derived from Steve Deering's Simple Internet Protocol proposal.
IIRC, they doubled it to 128 bits to
On 23/01/2010 17:51, Patrick Tracanelli wrote:
I am acting as transit for a number of ASNs, and my upstream peers do
filter my announces (as they should as I understand).
Absolutely.
Is there any best practices or RFC which shall suggest how this
community should be set up? Say, while I do
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 17:01:21 EST, Steven Bellovin said:
Actually, Scott Bradner and I share most of the credit (or blame) for
the change from 64 bits to 128.
During the days of the IPng directorate, quite a number of different
alternatives were considered. At one point, there was a
On Jan 24, 2010, at 6:26 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 17:01:21 EST, Steven Bellovin said:
Actually, Scott Bradner and I share most of the credit (or blame) for
the change from 64 bits to 128.
During the days of the IPng directorate, quite a number of different
On Jan 23, 2010, at 8:41 AM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
Reginald Chauvet, the owner of the Data Center in Boutillers, in which the
.ht Country Code registry is a tenant, has left Haiti with his family. All
the critical telecom infrastructures are located at the Data Center in
Boutillers.
On 24/01/2010, at 5:28 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 01:52:21PM +0100, Mathias Seiler
wrote:
I use a /126 if possible but have also configured one /64 just for the link
between two routers. This works great but when I think that I'm wasting 2^64
- 2
On 24/01/10 12:54, Owen DeLong wrote:
Use the /64... It's OK... IPv6 was designed with that in mind.
I'd suggest using a /126. For two reasons.
1) Using EUI-64 addresses on router-router links is an error, the
consequences of which you encounter the first time you replace
some faulty
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 18:41:18 -0500
Steven Bellovin s...@cs.columbia.edu wrote:
On Jan 24, 2010, at 6:26 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 17:01:21 EST, Steven Bellovin said:
Actually, Scott Bradner and I share most of the credit (or blame) for
the change from 64
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:12:04 +1030
Glen Turner g...@gdt.id.au wrote:
On 24/01/10 12:54, Owen DeLong wrote:
Use the /64... It's OK... IPv6 was designed with that in mind.
I'd suggest using a /126. For two reasons.
1) Using EUI-64 addresses on router-router links is an error, the
During the days of the IPng directorate, quite a number of different
alternatives were considered. At one point, there was a compromise proposal
known as the Big 10 design, because it was propounded at the Big Ten
Conference Center near O'Hare. One feature of it was addresses of length
Figured I'd drop a note here reminding folks of the
signed root zone publication timeline, which calls for
L root to begin serving a 'DURZ' the week of 1/25/2010
-- which is now - depending on what timezone you're in:
http://www.root-dnssec.org/2010/01/14/status-update-january-2010/
If
Good point, tomorrow/today we'll start seeing what gets broken and
hopefully why.
Regards.
Jorge
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Danny McPherson da...@tcb.net wrote:
Figured I'd drop a note here reminding folks of the
signed root zone publication timeline, which calls for
L root to begin
In message 202705b1001241834l5b1911bat97ee2130f632f...@mail.gmail.com, Jorge
Amodio writes:
Good point, tomorrow/today we'll start seeing what gets broken and
hopefully why.
Regards.
Jorge
I don't expect to see much until the last root server (J) switches
over. DNS implemententations are
Danny/NANOG'ers
L-Root will start serving DURZ 2010-01-27 2000 UTC.
Let me know if you have any questions
Mehmet Akcin
ICANN/L-ROOT
On 1/24/10 6:30 PM, Danny McPherson da...@tcb.net wrote:
Figured I'd drop a note here reminding folks of the
signed root zone publication timeline, which
On 2010-01-24, at 21:30, Danny McPherson wrote:
Figured I'd drop a note here reminding folks of the
signed root zone publication timeline, which calls for
L root to begin serving a 'DURZ' the week of 1/25/2010
-- which is now - depending on what timezone you're in:
On Jan 24, 2010, at 4:29 PM, Nathan Ward wrote:
On 24/01/2010, at 5:28 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 01:52:21PM +0100, Mathias
Seiler wrote:
I use a /126 if possible but have also configured one /64 just for the link
between two routers. This
23 matches
Mail list logo
