Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: rfc 3091,3092,3098
From: Shawn McMahon <smcmahon () eiv com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 21:59:26 -0400

On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 06:52:39PM -0700, Micah McNelly wrote:
I am very unclear about the nature of the following rfcs:

3091 Pi Digit Generation Protocol
3098 How to Advertise Responsibly etc etc.
3092 Etymology of "Foo"

Is this some kind of joke?  I am seriously confused.

Sounds to me like you're not confused at all.

I like 2100, myself.  1149 is a classic, as well, and has the interesting
advantage that it's actually been implemented in the field.

See http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/ for details.

Attachment: _bin

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]