IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: ASN draft

Tony Bates <Tony.Bates@mci.net> Tue, 07 February 1995 19:30 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06307; 7 Feb 95 14:30 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06303; 7 Feb 95 14:30 EST
Received: from interlock.ans.net by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11440; 7 Feb 95 14:30 EST
Received: by interlock.ans.net id AA46808 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 1.1 for iwg-out@ans.net); Tue, 7 Feb 1995 14:19:24 -0500
Received: by interlock.ans.net (Internal Mail Agent-2); Tue, 7 Feb 1995 14:19:24 -0500
Received: by interlock.ans.net (Internal Mail Agent-1); Tue, 7 Feb 1995 14:19:24 -0500
Message-Id: <199502071919.OAA10408@lovefm.reston.mci.net>
To: bmanning@isi.edu
Cc: bgp@ans.net
Subject: Re: ASN draft
In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 07 Feb 1995 10:54:00 PST. <m0rbv38-00030EC@rip.psg.com>
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Tony Bates <Tony.Bates@mci.net>
X-Phone: +1 703 715 7521
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 1995 14:19:13 -0500
X-Orig-Sender: tony@mci.net

I was planning to try to walk some of Bills comments but this whole
mail thread seems to have said nothing worthy of any change to the
draft as I see it. Thus far, Bill is the only one at issue with
anything and he seems to be at issue with the whole wolrd as well, so
much of this is lost. There is great confusion here with allocation,
registration and routing registries in all of this and his view of the
world is certainly one I don't share. Unless I hear something (or
Yakov as chair feels we need to do more on this) I dont plan to change
any of it. 

			--Tony.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email