nanog mailing list archives
Re: verio arrogance
From: Austin Schutz <tex () off org>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 10:47:08 -0700
On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 05:55:51PM -0400, up () 3 am wrote:
This is really old news...actually, I seem to recall that they would only accept /19 or shorter prefixes from former Class A & B space...I pressed Sprint for a /21 from the swamp (instead of the former Class A space /21 they initially assigned) because of Verio's policy, in fact. They must have softened the policy within the past year or so to /21 or shorter.
They tend to match the size of the smallest block assigned by the registries. Austin
Current thread:
- verio arrogance Ralph Doncaster (Jul 15)
- Re: verio arrogance Richard A Steenbergen (Jul 15)
- Re: verio arrogance Marshall Eubanks (Jul 15)
- Re: verio arrogance Ralph Doncaster (Jul 15)
- RE: verio arrogance Daniel Golding (Jul 18)
- Re: verio arrogance up (Jul 15)
- Re: verio arrogance Austin Schutz (Jul 17)
- Re: verio arrogance Brian Wallingford (Jul 17)
- china telecom noc contact ? Anthony Pardini (Jul 17)
- Re: china telecom noc contact ? German Martinez (Jul 17)
- Re: verio arrogance Kurt Erik Lindqvist (Jul 18)
- Re: verio arrogance Peter E. Fry (Jul 18)
- Re: verio arrogance Ralph Doncaster (Jul 18)
- Re: verio arrogance Mark Kent (Jul 18)
- Re: verio arrogance Stephen Griffin (Jul 26)
- Re: verio arrogance Ralph Doncaster (Jul 26)
- Re: verio arrogance Stephen Griffin (Jul 26)
- Re: verio arrogance Austin Schutz (Jul 17)
- Re: verio arrogance Richard A Steenbergen (Jul 15)