The Cidr Report

Philip Smith pfs at
Wed Jan 16 10:53:57 UTC 2002

Yes, it was an old message which got resent for some reason when the box 

The workstation is back on line, and the Friday report should reappear as 
normal. Last night's run worked just fine, with the results on the CIDR 
Report webpage

Thanks to everyone who let us know there was a problem... :-)


At 11:57 15/01/2002 -0500, Joe Abley wrote:
>On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 09:21:07AM +0200, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 25 May 2001, Tony Bates wrote:
> >
> > Something wrong here.  Today is not May 25 and we *never* see a drop of 3K
> > prefixes.  -Hank
>The mail was delayed for about 10 months (on, looks
>like). Either that, or the dates in the received headers are wrong,
>and various cisco machines have consistently wacky ideas about what
>the current date is.
> > > This is an auto-generated mail on Fri May 25 23:00:00 PDT 2001
> > > It is not checked before it leaves my workstation.However, hopefully
> > > you will find this report interesting and will take the time to look
> > > through this to see if you can improve theamount of aggregation you
> > > perform.

More information about the NANOG mailing list