nanog mailing list archives
Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF
From: Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg () ripe net>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 17:00:55 +0100
> Tony Bates <Tony.Bates () mci net> writes: > To expand on this a little. GISD is somewhat at a standstill. I am > partly repsonsible for this for starting something and not seeing it > through due to change of projects at the time. Unfortunately the new > chair of this group has also had little time to put in. This could be > a very useful part of the provider performance work but will need some > direct drive at this point. Tony, you are not to blame for the standstill. You have helped to establish a very good framework for a service description together with a plan on how to fill it with substance. Apparently there is not enough interest anywhere to put in the work. Otherwise someone would have taken the lead and others would have followed. Daniel
Current thread:
- Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF, (continued)
- Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF Mike O'Dell (Mar 10)
- Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF Scott Bradner (Mar 06)
- Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF Scott Bradner (Mar 06)
- Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF Stan Barber (Mar 09)
- Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF Kent W. England (Mar 10)
- Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF Jeff . Ogden (Mar 12)
- Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF Bill Manning (Mar 12)
- Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF Henry Clark (Mar 12)
- Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF bmanning (Mar 14)
- Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF Tony Bates (Mar 14)
- Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF Daniel Karrenberg (Mar 14)
- Re: IP provider performance measurement BOF bmanning (Mar 14)