On 17/09/2013 17:49, S Moonesamy wrote:
Hi John,
At 08:31 16-09-2013, John C Klensin wrote:
By the way, while I understand all of the reasons why we don't
want to actually replace 2026 (and agree with most of them),
things are getting to the point that it takes far too much
energy
Hi John,
At 08:31 16-09-2013, John C Klensin wrote:
By the way, while I understand all of the reasons why we don't
want to actually replace 2026 (and agree with most of them),
things are getting to the point that it takes far too much
energy to actually figure out what the rules are. Perhaps
