Lowell Gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Kurt Erik Lindqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On 2005-03-17, at 15.02, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
> >
> > > Kurtis Lindqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >> Shouldn't we be a
Kurt Erik Lindqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 2005-03-17, at 15.02, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
>
> > Kurtis Lindqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Shouldn't we be a bit more explicit on what routers/hosts should do
> >> with
> >> th
Kurtis Lindqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, Bob Hinden wrote:
> > New or updated implementations are not required to support this
> > address type. Existing implementations and deployments may continue
> > to use these addresses.
>
> Shouldn't we be a bit
Alex Conta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Pekka Savola wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Alex Conta wrote:
> >
> >>"The rate-limiting parameters SHOULD be configurable per node,
> >> if the node has similar speed/bandwidth interfaces, and/or per
> >> interface, if the node has disimilar speed/bandwidt
Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The NAT divides the network into two areas, the difference between them
> being that certain things look different when seen from points of view
> in the two areas. One of the things that differs is whether the NAT
> box appears to be a router or a non-routing
