[57305] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Abuse.cc ???
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Thu Apr 3 10:44:57 2003
To: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>
Cc: "McBurnett, Jim" <jmcburnett@msmgmt.com>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 03 Apr 2003 10:31:39 EST."
<20030403153139.400237B4D@berkshire.research.att.com>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 10:44:22 -0500
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--==_Exmh_582079666P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Thu, 03 Apr 2003 10:31:39 EST, "Steven M. Bellovin" said:
> >Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this against RFC current practice?
> >
>
> Yes -- see RFC 2142. But the IETF has no enforcement arm...
That would be NANOG's job (as much as it's anybody's). Soooo...
http://www.rfc-ignorant.org
--==_Exmh_582079666P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQE+jFbWcC3lWbTT17ARAoZLAJ4iSwfgvGe8ZW/zMRCO9ugwhuF8kQCfemRt
C+CXSaKL6333gchsNqLovFI=
=xm5d
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_582079666P--
