[123155] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Antonio Querubin)
Mon Mar 1 14:20:02 2010
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 09:12:58 -1000 (HST)
From: "Antonio Querubin" <tony@lava.net>
To: <lir@uralttk.ru>
In-Reply-To: <480CA8B6-D640-44D6-8870-2CC262C75F57@delong.com>
Cc: lir@uralttk.ru, nanog@nanog.org, members-discuss@ripe.net
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Mar 1, 2010, at 11:55 PM, Adam Waite wrote:
>> Not since 1992......what you're looking for these days is NIPRnet and SIPRnet, and ESnet, etc, etc, etc.
> Um, actually, I would say that in all of those cases, including ARPANET when it existed, you are
> dealing with a government sponsored network rather than a government run network.
>
> Generally, in each of those cases, the government provides some or all of the money to keep
> the network going, but, has very little to do with dictating policy or operational aspects of the
> network.
I think DISA and DoD would argue about that claim with regard to NIPRNet
and SIPRNet :)
Antonio Querubin
808-545-5282 x3003
e-mail/xmpp: tony@lava.net
