[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RFC 1149

Subject: RFC 1149
From: jared at puck.nether.net (Jared Mauch)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 08:55:46 -0400
In-reply-to: <CAK__KzszTVyGLKhJNP9GHSVc0wm5EPGHova=9F16O2BrSPxZqQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001801ce2f3b$0161b6c0$04252440$@net> <CAMdF1xWmsH6TXL9HesVV4CZD3Yte5tXdDkHOJWQsbCr7vwsWVg@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <CAK__KzszTVyGLKhJNP9GHSVc0wm5EPGHova=9F16O2BrSPxZqQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Apr 1, 2013, at 10:37 PM, George Herbert <george.herbert at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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...

I'm working to make our network comply with the latest standards in rfc6919

- Jared

References:
- RFC 1149
  - From: eschwei at comcast.net (Ed Schweitzer)
- RFC 1149
  - From: eaptech at gmail.com (Eric Adler)
- RFC 1149
  - From: jeff-kell at utc.edu (Jeff Kell)
- RFC 1149
  - From: george.herbert at gmail.com (George Herbert)

Prev by Date: Open Resolver Problems
Next by Date: BCP38 tester?
Previous by thread: RFC 1149
Next by thread: RFC 1149
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread