nanog mailing list archives

RE: network name 101100010100110.net

From: Nathan Eisenberg <nathan () atlasnetworks us>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:24:58 +0000

I'm assuming we aren't making jokes here, but 3com.com was created in
1986:


I'm confused.  3com.com would not appear to be entirely numerical.  Or maybe someone spiked my coffee this morning.

Best Regards,
Nathan Eisenberg

Current thread:

Re: network name 101100010100110.net, (continued)
- - - Re: network name 101100010100110.net Mark Andrews (Oct 17)
    - Re: network name 101100010100110.net Joe Hamelin (Oct 17)
    - Re: network name 101100010100110.net Joel Jaeggli (Oct 17)
    - Re: network name 101100010100110.net Joe Hamelin (Oct 18)
    - Re: network name 101100010100110.net Barry Shein (Oct 18)
    - Re: network name 101100010100110.net Tony Finch (Oct 18)
  - Re: network name 101100010100110.net Steve Atkins (Oct 17)
  - Message not available
    - Re: network name 101100010100110.net Roland Perry (Oct 19)
    - Re: network name 101100010100110.net David Shaw (Oct 19)
    - RE: network name 101100010100110.net Deepak Jain (Oct 19)
    - RE: network name 101100010100110.net Nathan Eisenberg (Oct 19)
    - Re: network name 101100010100110.net bmanning (Oct 19)
    - RE: network name 101100010100110.net Tony Finch (Oct 20)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Claudio Lapidus (Oct 18)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net William Herrin (Oct 20)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Robert Bonomi (Oct 18)
  - Re: network name 101100010100110.net Roland Perry (Oct 19)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Robert Bonomi (Oct 18)