[45302] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: NANOG 24: NAP BoF
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Peter Ford)
Wed Jan 30 03:23:04 2002
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 00:22:21 -0800
Message-ID: <01C133474E27D04FABA48D02078CF41D0A08C5@df-dinky.dogfood>
From: "Peter Ford" <peterf@Exchange.Microsoft.com>
To: "Randy Bush" <randy@psg.com>,
"Alan Hannan" <alan@routingloop.com>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Looks like all of you can use the scheduled time to establish a glossary
so that you understand why you are at the NAP BoF. =20
Or perhaps there needs to be a liaison established to an established
Internet Etymology and Terminology Forum.
Apologies in advance and in arrears, peter
-----Original Message-----
From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy@psg.com]=20
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 10:40 PM
To: Alan Hannan
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: NANOG 24: NAP BoF
> Something bothers me about this thread, and I think it is the
> assertion that there is a proper definition for 'NAP' as
> differentiated from 'IXP' or what not.
yup. george santayana was right
