This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/members-discuss@ripe.net/
[members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group (fwd)
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group (fwd)
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group (fwd)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Antonio Querubin
tony at lava.net
Mon Mar 1 20:12:58 CET 2010
On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Owen DeLong wrote: > On Mar 1, 2010, at 11:55 PM, Adam Waite wrote: >> Not since 1992......what you're looking for these days is NIPRnet and SIPRnet, and ESnet, etc, etc, etc. > Um, actually, I would say that in all of those cases, including ARPANET when it existed, you are > dealing with a government sponsored network rather than a government run network. > > Generally, in each of those cases, the government provides some or all of the money to keep > the network going, but, has very little to do with dictating policy or operational aspects of the > network. I think DISA and DoD would argue about that claim with regard to NIPRNet and SIPRNet :) Antonio Querubin 808-545-5282 x3003 e-mail/xmpp: tony at lava.net
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group (fwd)
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] Re: RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group (fwd)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]