RFC 1149

Tue Apr 2 19:41:06 UTC 2013

"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a 747 full of DLT cartridges."

Owen

On Apr 2, 2013, at 11:31 , "Scott Berkman" <scott at sberkman.net> wrote:

> Hey careful, Pigeons have won this fight before:
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8248056.stm
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: George Herbert [mailto:george.herbert at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 10:37 PM
> To: Jeff Kell
> Cc: NANOG
> Subject: Re: RFC 1149
> 
> Packets, shmackets.  I'm just upset that my BGP over Semaphore Towers
> routing protocol extension hasn't been experimentally validated yet.
> 
> Whoever you are who keeps flying pigeons between my test towers, you can't
> deliver packets without proper routing updates!  Knock it off long enough
> for me to converge the #@$#$@ routing table...
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Jeff Kell <jeff-kell at utc.edu> wrote:
> 
>> On 4/1/2013 10:15 PM, Eric Adler wrote:
>>> Make sure you don't miss the QoS implementation of RFC 2549 (and 
>>> make
>> sure
>>> that you're ready to implement RFC 6214).  You'll be highly 
>>> satisfied
>> with
>>> the results (presuming you and your packets end up in one of the 
>>> higher quality classes).
>>> I'd also suggest a RFC 2322 compliant DHCP server for devices inside 
>>> the hurricane zone, but modified by implementing zip ties such that 
>>> the C47s aren't released under heavy (wind or water) loads.
>> 
>> Actually, given recent events, I'd emphasize and advocate RFC3514
>> (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3514.txt) which I think is LONG overdue 
>> for adoption.  The implementation would forego most of the currently 
>> debated topics as related to network abuse or misuse :)
>> 
>> Jeff
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> --
> -george william herbert
> george.herbert at gmail.com
>