nanog mailing list archives
Re: ISP network design of non-authoritative caches
From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 15:32:01 -0800
as this is a subject: that actually interests me, i.e. i don't want to procmail it, could folk please not respond to the usual sociopaths, who i and many others have procmailed? you are not going to change their minds, as they have little of them left. just plonk them or hit delete. thanks. randy
Current thread:
- Re: how many roots must DNS have before it's considered broken (Re: ISP network design of non-authoritative caches), (continued)
- Re: how many roots must DNS have before it's considered broken (Re: ISP network design of non-authoritative caches) Sean Donelan (Nov 21)
- RE: how many roots must DNS have before it's considered broken (Re: ISP network design of non-authoritative caches) W.D.McKinney (Nov 22)
- RE: how many roots must DNS have before it's considered broken (Re: ISP network design of non-authoritative caches) Randy Bush (Nov 22)
- Message not available
- Re: how many roots must DNS have before it's considered broken (Re: ISP network design of non-authoritative caches) Simon Higgs (Nov 27)
- Re: how many roots must DNS have before it's considered broken (Re: ISP network design of non-authoritative caches) Simon Higgs (Nov 27)
- Re: ISP network design of non-authoritative caches Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 19)
- Re: ISP network design of non-authoritative caches Simon Higgs (Nov 19)
- Re: ISP network design of non-authoritative caches Joel Baker (Nov 18)
- Re: ISP network design of non-authoritative caches Randy Bush (Nov 18)
- Re: ISP network design of non-authoritative caches Rich Fulton (Nov 18)