A6/DNAME not needed for v6 renumbering [Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]]

Mon Nov 29 09:42:39 UTC 2004

--On Sunday, November 28, 2004 11:35 PM -0800 "william(at)elan.net" 
<william at elan.net> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, Pekka Savola wrote:
>
>> 6.  Acknowledgments
>> [...]
>>     Some took it on themselves to convince the authors that the concept
>>     of network renumbering as a normal or frequent procedure is daft.
> [Note: check spell error - "draft" not "daft"]
>
No, I think "daft" is the word intended in this case.  It is a synonym
for "incompetent" or "stupid".

I don't happen to agree with it, but, I think that is what was intended.

Owen

-- 
If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20041129/35e0293d/attachment.sig>