nanog mailing list archives
Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8)
From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2019 14:18:37 -0700
something is broken on the nanog list. usually we have this discussion twice a year. this time it may have been a couple of years gap. what broke? randy
Current thread:
- Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8), (continued)
- Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8) George Herbert (Jul 22)
- Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8) Ross Tajvar (Jul 22)
- Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8) Greg Skinner via NANOG (Jul 26)
- Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) Doug Barton (Jul 26)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) William Herrin (Jul 26)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) Doug Barton (Jul 26)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) William Herrin (Jul 26)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) Doug Barton (Jul 27)
- Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) bzs (Jul 27)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) johnl (Jul 27)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) Randy Bush (Jul 27)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) Stephen Satchell (Jul 27)
- Re: 44/8 John Curran (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 William Herrin (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 John Curran (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Tom Beecher (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Matt Harris (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Matthew Kaufman (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 John Curran (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Matthew Kaufman (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 John Curran (Jul 22)