mailing list archives
RE: RFC 1149
From: "Scott Berkman" <scott () sberkman net>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 14:31:41 -0400
Hey careful, Pigeons have won this fight before:
From: George Herbert [mailto:george.herbert () gmail com]
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 10:37 PM
To: Jeff Kell
Subject: Re: RFC 1149
Packets, shmackets. I'm just upset that my BGP over Semaphore Towers
routing protocol extension hasn't been experimentally validated yet.
Whoever you are who keeps flying pigeons between my test towers, you can't
deliver packets without proper routing updates! Knock it off long enough
for me to converge the # () $#$@ routing table...
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Jeff Kell <jeff-kell () utc edu> wrote:
On 4/1/2013 10:15 PM, Eric Adler wrote:
Make sure you don't miss the QoS implementation of RFC 2549 (and
that you're ready to implement RFC 6214). You'll be highly
the results (presuming you and your packets end up in one of the
higher quality classes).
I'd also suggest a RFC 2322 compliant DHCP server for devices inside
the hurricane zone, but modified by implementing zip ties such that
the C47s aren't released under heavy (wind or water) loads.
Actually, given recent events, I'd emphasize and advocate RFC3514
(http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3514.txt) which I think is LONG overdue
for adoption. The implementation would forego most of the currently
debated topics as related to network abuse or misuse :)
-george william herbert
george.herbert () gmail com