nanog mailing list archives
Re: IP allocations, renumbering, and RFC 2050
From: Tony Li <tli () juniper net>
Date: 07 Oct 1998 23:56:51 -0700
brad () null0 qual net (Bradley Reynolds) writes:
After taking a cursory glance at RFC2050, i happened upon the ambiguous and unintelligable wording 'best current practice'. Even though the definition of this term was thoroughly obfuscated, i did not find LAW or JESUS SPAKE preceding any of the edicts contained within the mentioned rfc.
Please see RFC 1818. Tony
Current thread:
- IP allocations, renumbering, and RFC 2050 Scott Gifford (Oct 07)
- Re: IP allocations, renumbering, and RFC 2050 Robert Boyle (Oct 07)
- RE: IP allocations, renumbering, and RFC 2050 Ron Stear (Oct 08)
- Re: IP allocations, renumbering, and RFC 2050 Roeland M.J. Meyer (Oct 07)
- Re: IP allocations, renumbering, and RFC 2050 Jeremy Porter (Oct 07)
- Re: IP allocations, renumbering, and RFC 2050 Bradley Reynolds (Oct 08)
- Re: IP allocations, renumbering, and RFC 2050 Tony Li (Oct 08)
- Re: IP allocations, renumbering, and RFC 2050 Karl Denninger (Oct 08)
- Re: IP allocations, renumbering, and RFC 2050 Jeremy Porter (Oct 07)
- Re: IP allocations, renumbering, and RFC 2050 Robert Boyle (Oct 07)
- Re: IP allocations, renumbering, and RFC 2050 Andrew (Oct 08)
- Re: IP allocations, renumbering, and RFC 2050 John A. Tamplin (Oct 08)