nanog mailing list archives

Re: US patent 5473599


From: Matt Palmer <mpalmer () hezmatt org>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2014 12:39:57 +1000

On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 07:33:45PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
On May 7, 2014, at 4:19 PM, Matt Palmer <mpalmer () hezmatt org> wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:57:01PM -0400, David Conrad wrote:
However, assume that the OpenBSD developers did document their protocol
and requested an IESG action and was refused.  Do you believe that would
justify squatting on an already assigned number?

I'm going to go with "yes", just to be contrary.  At the point that the IESG
refused to deal with 'em, they've effectively been ostracised from "the
Internet community", and thus they are under no obligation to act within the
rules and customs of that community.

I don’t believe for one second that the IESG refused to deal with ‘em.

Neither do I.  That wasn't the question I was answering, though -- the
scenario described was "assume that...".

- Matt


Current thread: