IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: ASN draft

Sean Doran <smd@cesium.clock.org> Tue, 07 February 1995 14:20 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01730; 7 Feb 95 9:20 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01726; 7 Feb 95 9:20 EST
Received: from interlock.ans.net by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05186; 7 Feb 95 9:20 EST
Received: by interlock.ans.net id AA33670 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 1.1 for iwg-out@ans.net); Tue, 7 Feb 1995 09:10:06 -0500
Received: by interlock.ans.net (Internal Mail Agent-2); Tue, 7 Feb 1995 09:10:06 -0500
Received: by interlock.ans.net (Internal Mail Agent-1); Tue, 7 Feb 1995 09:10:06 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Sean Doran <smd@cesium.clock.org>
To: bmanning@isi.edu
Subject: Re: ASN draft
Cc: bgp@ans.net, jhawk@panix.com, pst@cisco.com, tony@mci.net
Message-Id: <95Feb7.060959pst.6246@cesium.clock.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 06:09:52 -0800

| So, we agree here.  The draft should change.

I'm not sure that I do agree.  If you want to read
things that way, though, be my guest.  It's not something
I think of as very important, as these days operations
will change interdomain routing reality faster than drafts 
can describe it anyway.

	Sean.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email