[171620] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: US patent 5473599
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matt Palmer)
Wed May 7 19:20:03 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Thu, 8 May 2014 09:19:53 +1000
From: Matt Palmer <mpalmer@hezmatt.org>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Mail-Followup-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <6E38BC9A-9C95-46A1-8302-E6FB2AD4553E@virtualized.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:57:01PM -0400, David Conrad wrote:
> However, assume that the OpenBSD developers did document their protocol
> and requested an IESG action and was refused. Do you believe that would
> justify squatting on an already assigned number?
I'm going to go with "yes", just to be contrary. At the point that the IESG
refused to deal with 'em, they've effectively been ostracised from "the
Internet community", and thus they are under no obligation to act within the
rules and customs of that community.
- Matt
