nanog mailing list archives
Re: CIDR Report
From: Chris Williams <chris.williams () third-rail net>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 13:29:34 -0400
I agree with the thought, but I think the reality will be that the solution will favor those that have a substantial financial interest.
Well, as another poster pointed out, ignoring the needs of a large enough group of users is likely to result in that group pressuring legislators to intervene, a situation which I have trouble imagining as beneficial for *anyone*.
Current thread:
- RE: CIDR Report, (continued)
- RE: CIDR Report Roeland Meyer (E-mail) (May 13)
- Re: CIDR Report Randy Bush (May 13)
- Re: CIDR Report Danny McPherson (May 13)
- RE: CIDR Report Roeland M.J. Meyer (May 13)
- Re: CIDR Report ww (May 13)
- Re: CIDR Report Joe Provo - Network Architect (May 14)
- Re: CIDR Report Chris Williams (May 15)
- Re: CIDR Report Adrian Chadd (May 15)
- Re: CIDR Report Chris Williams (May 15)
- RE: CIDR Report Bradly Walters (May 15)
- Re: CIDR Report Chris Williams (May 15)
- RE: CIDR Report Roeland M.J. Meyer (May 13)
- RE: CIDR Report Roeland M.J. Meyer (May 14)
- Re: CIDR Report Peter Galbavy (May 15)
- Test Roeland Meyer (E-mail) (May 14)
- Re: CIDR Report Chris Williams (May 15)
- Re: CIDR Report brett watson (May 15)
- Re: CIDR Report Chris Williams (May 15)