AS Leakage

Darrin Walton darrinw at nixc.net
Thu Apr 5 02:33:31 UTC 2001


  |+ Did I say I didn't believe it?  I said I didn't realize he worked for
  |+ exodus.  Had I known that, I wouldn't have suggested that if he filters
  |+ _701_ from his other connections, he would lose 701 connectivity in the
  |+ event that his 701 connection went down.

	Are we done trying to show off our regex skills?

  |+ There is nothing wrong on my side.  We're not a direct peer of 701.  I
  |+ never said I did.  I do have paths into 701 however.  You didn't specify
  |+ direct 701_13944.

	Maybe you the one who does not understand the English language
very well.  Let me show you the original question I asked:

  |$        So, you were under the belief that a rather large service
  |$ provider, only had one connection to UUNet?  How many paths do you,
  |$ yourself have into UU?  Are they anything > DS3?

Your response:

  |+ As for paths into 701, we three.  All of them > DS3.

Caught in a lie, and trying to cover our ass now?  Did not think people
would remember what was posted, less than an hour ago?  How stupid do you
take us for?

I think we can end this thread now.  As you can see, you are just making
yourself look worse, than you already do.

-- 
darrin walton, darrinw at nixc.net





More information about the NANOG mailing list