RE: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657]

2002-04-05 Thread Tom Ranalli
My two cents - for what it's worth ... first, we all understand the purpose of this forum, but like in 3D conversations, sometimes the topics veer. Perhaps we need to redirect things back, but my God, folks - we're human beings, after all. Just because we're so intimately involved in machinery, t

RE: Are all the Cisco jobs for CCIEs? [7:40328]

2002-04-04 Thread Tom Ranalli
Great email, x -- if I was in a position to hire someone right now, you'd be at the top of my list. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of x Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 9:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Are all the Cisco jobs for CCIEs

RE: what does 0 in 0Xnnnn mean? [7:40372]

2002-04-03 Thread Tom Ranalli
Not sure if this is a satisfactory answer, but I believe the convention harkens back to Kernighan and Ritchie, the inventors of the C programming language. 0x was an indicator for a hex value; 0 alone was an indicator for octal. I have no clue why 0d was used for octal in Cisco-ese. -Origin

RE: MPLS White Paper Announcement [7:40207]

2002-04-02 Thread Tom Ranalli
Interesting. Yesterday, I just copied the HTML and changed the charset to US-ASCII and voila - when I browsed it, I could read it. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Semion Lisyansky Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 9:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED

RE: Focus on RFCs [7:40046]

2002-04-01 Thread Tom Ranalli
Well-described comments on your part, may I add. Perhaps a shade off the mark, though. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Neiberger Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 9:01 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Focus on RFCs [7:40046] I think th