Sprint NAP

Marc E. Hidalgo mhidalgo at sprint.net
Thu Jun 20 22:29:30 UTC 1996


One must increasingly _spell things out_ these days. Good to elliminate 
misunderstandings ; bad to not be able to depend on goodwill and doing 
the right thing.

Marc

On Thu, 20 Jun 1996, Tim Salo wrote:

> Subject: Re: Sprint NAP
> 
> > To: Peter Lothberg <roll at stupi.se>
> > Cc: "nanog" <nanog at merit.edu>
> > Subject: Sprint NAP 
> > From: Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg at ripe.net>
> > Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 10:04:26 +0200
> > 
> >   > Peter Lothberg <roll at stupi.se> writes:
> >   > 
> >   > 		SPRINT NETWORK ACCESS POINT (NAP)
> >   > 		       TERMS AND CONDITIONS
> >   > ....
> >   > 
> >   > 6.	IP Address Assignment
> >   > 
> >   > The customer shall receive his IP address assignment(s) from Sprint.  Any
> >   > address(es) provided by Sprint shall remain the property of Sprint ...
> >                                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > Address ownership .... what a concept.
> > Although this is doing the right thing, the wording is dubious.
> 
> Actually, I believe that the addresses in question are _host_ addresses,
> (for devices directly attached to the Sprint NAP).  I don't quite know
> what someone would do with a Sprint NAP host address if they "kept"
> it.
> 
> You are correct that the language seems rather emphatic to networking
> types, but it probably works well for the lawyers.
> 
> -tjs
> 





More information about the NANOG mailing list