[171653] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: US patent 5473599
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alain Hebert)
Thu May 8 07:31:07 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 07:31:00 -0400
From: Alain Hebert <ahebert@pubnix.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <45453.1399510590@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Reply-To: ahebert@pubnix.net
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
And that's why C. should use a more appropriate example to defend
his position.
By this thread, I suspect, that whoever dealt with those different
organization for OpenBSD & CARP, lacked the skills to accomplish the
task and got shut down for being an ass.
PS:
Being of the Church of FreeBSD, I freely acknowledge that I got
no clue about the scope of the drama that CARP was involved with.
But I was aware of Cisco/VRRP/HSRP patent and CARP and found
CIsco to be a bit of a bully to actually enforce it for such a simple
technology.
That being said, I was never attracted to OpenBSD for some "gut"
reason... I know why now =D
-----
Alain Hebert ahebert@pubnix.net
PubNIX Inc.
50 boul. St-Charles
P.O. Box 26770 Beaconsfield, Quebec H9W 6G7
Tel: 514-990-5911 http://www.pubnix.net Fax: 514-990-9443
On 05/07/14 20:56, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Wed, 07 May 2014 17:10:32 -0700, "Constantine A. Murenin" said:
>
>> Also, would you please be so kind as to finally explain to us why
>> Google can squat on the https port with SPDY,
> Because it doesn't squat on the port. It politely asks "Do you speak SPDY,
> or just https?" and then listens to what the other end replies.
