nanog mailing list archives
Re: Fw: "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...."
From: Steve Rubin <ser () tch org>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 01:31:12 -0800
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 01:58:20AM -0600, JIM FLEMING wrote:
If Karl[1] were here, he would probably refer to that as a NotWork, as opposed to a NetWork. [1] - http://www.denninger.net/
Ok, who let this nutcase back in? -- Steve Rubin / KG6DFV / Phone: (408)270-3258 Fax: (408)270-3273 Email: ser () tch org / N57DL / http://www.tch.org/~ser/
Current thread:
- Fw: "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." JIM FLEMING (Nov 20)
- Message not available
- Re: Fw: "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." JIM FLEMING (Nov 21)
- Re: Fw: "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." Steve Rubin (Nov 21)
- Re: Fw: "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." Edward S. Marshall (Nov 21)
- Re: Fw: "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." JIM FLEMING (Nov 21)
- Message not available