nanog mailing list archives
Re: network name 101100010100110.net
From: Per Carlson <pelle () hemmop com>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 08:07:41 +0200
Technically, no. But you probably fancy annoying people. I wouldn't imaging anyone typing that right on the first attempt. On 17 Oct 2010 06:47, "Day Domes" <daydomes () gmail com> wrote:
I have been tasked with coming up with a new name for are transit data network. I am thinking of using 101100010100110.net does anyone see any issues with this?
Current thread:
- network name 101100010100110.net Day Domes (Oct 16)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Joe Hamelin (Oct 16)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Day Domes (Oct 16)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Joe Hamelin (Oct 16)
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Day Domes (Oct 16)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Day Domes (Oct 16)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Joe Hamelin (Oct 16)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Per Carlson (Oct 16)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Matthew Palmer (Oct 16)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Joe Hamelin (Oct 16)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Matthew Palmer (Oct 16)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net James Hess (Oct 17)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net bmanning (Oct 17)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Mark Andrews (Oct 17)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Joe Hamelin (Oct 17)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Joel Jaeggli (Oct 17)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Joe Hamelin (Oct 18)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Barry Shein (Oct 18)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net bmanning (Oct 17)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Tony Finch (Oct 18)