nanog mailing list archives
Re: RFC 1918 network range choices
From: Daniel Karrenberg <dfk () ripe net>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2017 11:36:32 -0700
On 05/10/2017 13:28, Randy Bush wrote:
The answer seems to be "no, Jon's not answering his email anymore".jon was not a big supporter of rfc1918
If I recall correctly not one of the authors was a "big supporter". Some things are not full of beauty and glory; yet they have to be done. I recall a number of conversations with Jon about this, at least one of them face-to-face. I am convinced he fully agreed that it was necessary. Daniel
Current thread:
- RFC 1918 network range choices Jay R. Ashworth (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Akshay Kumar via NANOG (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Jay R. Ashworth (Oct 05)
- Message not available
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices John Kristoff (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Randy Bush (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Joe Klein (Oct 06)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Ryan Harden (Oct 06)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Daniel Karrenberg (Oct 06)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices John Kristoff (Oct 05)
- RE: RFC 1918 network range choices Jay Ashworth (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices valdis . kletnieks (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Brian Kantor (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Joe Provo (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Steve Feldman (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Lyndon Nerenberg (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Michael Thomas (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Alain Hebert (Oct 06)