[23882] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Severe Response Degradation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andrew Brown)
Wed Apr 28 11:17:24 1999
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 11:16:03 -0400
From: Andrew Brown <twofsonet@graffiti.com>
To: Daniel Senie <dts@senie.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Reply-To: Andrew Brown <atatat@atatdot.net>
In-Reply-To: <372724E6.E04A636F@senie.com>; from Daniel Senie on Wed, Apr 28, 1999 at 11:10:30AM -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
>> > well then, they're obviously clueless.
>>
>> Hasn't this come up here before? I'm too lazy to go check the
>> archive, but I seem to remember a discussion of this topic. IIRC,
>> the reason/excuse given (lame or not) was that they use equipment
>> that does not deal well/at all with CIDR or VLSM or somesuch. Or
>> am I thinking of someone else?
>
>Well, all of their gear is Cisco. Last I checked, I think Cisco was OK
>with CIDR and VLSM, and even unnumbered links.
perhaps they need to be told about "ip classless"?
>As for the cluelessness statements, my take is that they've got some
>very clueful people, and some very clueless people. They've also got the
>inertia of a company many times their size. Perhaps that's appropriate,
>though, as they are now owned, at least in part, by AT&T (via the TCI
>deal).
no offense to the clueful then. the clueless won't notice. :)
--
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
codewarrior@daemon.org * "ah! i see you have the internet
twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown) that goes *ping*!"
andrew@crossbar.com * "information is power -- share the wealth."
