North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

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

  • From: Owen DeLong
  • Date: Mon Nov 29 04:47:47 2004


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

Attachment: pgp00115.pgp
Description: PGP signature