February 1998 - lir-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Scaling the LIR Hierarchy
by philip bridge 25 Feb '98

25 Feb '98

Is anybody else starting to see the same scaling problem we are with the IR-LIR-Enduser hierarchy? We see two things happening: we ourselves are probably the largest ISP in Switzerland, which means we are getting a lot of bottom-tier ISPs as customers. At the same time, the VSE idea is catching on, so our ISP customers are themselves signing up lots of end-users who only need (and are prepared to accept) /27 or smaller assignments. This is causing us lots of problems, because our own LIR hostmaster team is dimensioned to assess requests from end-users connecting directly to our own network. Now in the past month I have seen 4 four requests from ISP customers for /24 ranges that should be assigned to their own VSE customers, but we have to reject the requests and ask the ISPs to re-submit 8 or so individual requests for each VSE end-user, which we have to vet. What makes this worse is that the ISPs are not set up to collect the usual info required for an assessment. It is also bloating our internal routing tables, and while not yet a problem, I would give it two years before it does become a problem. There are some ways we can improve the situation, but most of them involve discouraging ISPs from making these assignments (for example, we could charge prohibitivly for 'LIR' services if the end-user is not our customer, or we could suggest that ISPs wanting more than (say) a /22 for VSE customers should become a LIR itself). But I have to say that in most cases these assigments are probably justified - end-users really are buying into the idea of classless VSE assignments - and I think this community should do all in it's power to make it *easier* to make VSE assignments. On the other hand, we as a LIR simply cannot handle the rush of requests from end-users that are not our own customers... My suggestion: we need another tier in the IR-LIR-Enduser hierarchy. I suggest that LIRs be able to delegate a small range of space to a sub-LIR. For the sake of argument, this could be a /24, and one could stipulate that only VSE assignments can be made from this range. Of course, the assigning LIR is still held responsible for the correct assignment of this space, and could employ many/all of the techniques an IR itself uses to manage the activites of LIRs. The sub-LIR is responsible for assessment and assignment, and registration in the DB. The advantage is that this model is scalable, since it delegates much of the LIR function closer to the end-user. It also removes the motivation for small ISPs to become LIRs themselves and receive a perhaps unjustifiable large /19 allocation. A further advantage is that is improves route aggregation within the LIR's own internal routing system. Feedback? I am hurridly donning my asbestos suit in anticipation of the forthcoming blast of flames ;-) Phil ______________________________________________________________ Philip Bridge ++41 31 688 8262 bridge(a)ip-plus.net www.ip-plus.ch PGP: DE78 06B7 ACDB CB56 CE88 6165 A73F B703

1 0

Re: [ripe-167] ENOUGH!!!!!!
by Berislav Todorovic 24 Feb '98

24 Feb '98

>> I'm sure that closing this discussion would be dangerous, because >> during the Moscow meeting it have been said that silence would be >> regarded as consent. To create a separate Internet registry for a region, a consensus among interested parties in the region has to be achieved. The discussion on this list showed everything except consensus. Most discutants were from former Soviet republics (applogies if anyone will find himself/herself offended by this remark, but it is a fact), while most people from this list, located on the West side of the Russian border, expressed none or very small interest to take part in the discussion. Fist off, the point of my previous proposal to create a local mailing list in Russia (I've heard it exists) is not to stress out that this discussion is unuseful. On the contrary ... it IS useful, but it is being run at the WRONG PLACE! Secondly, it came to the point where consensus could not be reached. Since I'm living in a country whose destiny much resembles to the destiny of the former Soviet Union, my personal point of view of the further steps would be: * Move the discussion from the LIR-WG to the local mailng list. * Create a local working group, consisting of representatives of all interested parties. * Organize a public forum, meeting - either live or electronic. * Try to reach consensus within the working group. * Don't publish anything out of the local working group scope until there is a strong consensus among all (or, at least, among the majority of) interested parties. * Of course - someone will always stay unhappy, but that's everyday life ... * If the consensus among all (or significant majority of) interested parties can not be reached, forget the whole idea! It will be more like an awful marriage, than a good RIR! * If and when consensus is reached - publish the proposal to the RIPE, IANA and other interested parties and mailing lists. * To the rest of the world, all interested parties MUST show mutual consensus clearly. After it has been reached, noone MUST NOT express anything against the statements, built in the draft proposal. Good luck on the future work on the Russian RIR! ;-) Best regards, Beri .-------. | --+-- | Berislav Todorovic, B.Sc.E.E. | E-mail: BERI(a)etf.bg.ac.yu | /|\ Hostmaster of the YU TLD | |-(-+-)-| School of Electrical Engineering | Phone: (+381-11) 3221-419 | \|/ Bulevar Revolucije 73 | 3370-106 | --+-- | 11000 Belgrade SERBIA, YUGOSLAVIA | Fax: (+381-11) 3248-681 `-------' --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: [ripe-167] ENOUGH!!!!!!
by Ilya Shulman 24 Feb '98

24 Feb '98

-----Original Message----- From: Berislav Todorovic <BERI(a)etf.bg.ac.yu> To: violet(a)rosnet.net <violet(a)rosnet.net> Cc: lir-wg(a)ripe.net <lir-wg(a)ripe.net> Date: 23 FEWRALQ 1998 G. 16:32 Subject: Re: [ripe-167] ENOUGH!!!!!! >I'd suggest you to create a local mailing list somewhere in Russia, >publish its location and subscription info here on the LIR-WG and >transfer all this discussion there. The list should be opened to >anyone interested. I hope you'll achieve some solution acceptable >for everyone. There is such list in local-ir(a)ripn.net but it is in russian. So there are little chance if any that somebody from Europe will read this list. Though I understand that some of you may count this flow as "spam", some - as unnecessary waste of bandwidth. But on the other hand I think that it will be better if RIPE officials and LIR in Europe know the situation with ripe-167 project. And will be able to stop the development of RIR in Russia if need be. Also, I think that this subject has some relation with RIPE and Internet development. However, this list is under RIPE authority depends on them ;) Just my 2 roubles ;) ish ------ Ilya Shulman ish(a)east.ru +7-095-956-4951 ISH-RIPN East Connection ISP, Moscow, Russia. http://www.east.ru

3 2

Re: [ripe-167] Impressions brought from Moscow meeting
by Dmitri Bourkov 23 Feb '98

23 Feb '98

-----Original Message----- From: Andrew Stesin <stesin(a)gu.net> To: Sergey A. Mukhin <violet(a)rosnet.net> > Ok, we are waiting for a new better and solid document. > Show it to us, and we'll (probably) start thinking > on it... > Andrey, but you can agree that RIPE office in Moscow will be useful in any case. I think that it is clear that RIPN provides services in Moscow and we need it. Discussion about RIR should be continued, but it should not stop current work.

3 2

Re: [ripe-167] Impressions brought from Moscow meeting
by Sergey A. Mukhin 23 Feb '98

23 Feb '98

>>>>> "V" == Vladimir Lebedev <wal(a)rtsnet.ru> writes: V> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 12:51:55 +0300 V> To: lir-wg(a)ripe.net V> Cc: joker(a)rtsnet.ru, ant(a)rtsnet.ru, igor(a)rtsnet.ru V> Alexei Platonov wrote: >> According to Sergey Gulchuck: >> > >> > > Many people of ex-USSR countries speak Russian and ( for now ) not so >> > > many speak English ( alas! ). Thus language selection matters something too. >> > >> > I'm wondering why Moscovites try to decide something for other people. >> ^^^^^^^^^^ >> This is the English translation for "Moskali" ? >> >> May be we shall stop this discussion which is interesting for just a few people >> from the list? The Ukrainian ISPs introduced their coordinated decision >> and in fact you have nothing to add. Or may be you have too much free time ? V> Looking at the large number of replies on the [ripe-167] topic I think that number V> of people who interested in this discussion is not just "few". Moreover, in this V> discussion participating peolple not only from CIS countries, but all over the V> Europe. V> I'm looking at the discussion and it reminds me a situation in FidoNet at the early V> 90th. There was a try to separate CIS countries netwokrs from Europe! Our V> "independent" Moscow's guys wanted to create Zone 7 for CIS, independend from Zone 2 V> (Europe) with own Zone Coordinator and all other attributes of power, for example V> rights to assign Fido network numbers for geographical regions. Formal reasons was V> absolutely the same: language issues, time zone difference etc., etc. Thanks God, V> that "coup" was unseccussful. V> Now the history repeating, but at this time with Internet. I hope the finish of the V> story will be the same. Well, history never repeats the same exactly. Just something in common with the past; often appearance but not the actual reasons. Yes, there seems to be something in common here. Far not everything, however. First, now we ( ISPs ) have a pretty simple dilemma: A) we ( I mean the Association ) takes the control or B) our government does it. Do you need any more comments ? V> I want to make clear for the audience the real reason of this "independance V> movement": MONOPOLIZATION OF IP NETWORK ADDRESSES ASSIGNMENT IN RUSSIA AND OTHER CIS V> COUNTRIES BY ROSNIIROS (RIPN). V> RIPN had already monopolized the domain name delegation under ".ru", and the only V> thing this they doesn't hove at this time is control under the network addresses. Nope. Here you are wrong. RIPN had monopolized RU. Internic had monopolized COM, NET, ORG and EDU. RIPE had monopolized a big block of IP address space. God had monopolized the Universe. How far it is possible to get thinking that way ? V> If they receive this control, can you imagine the amount of money that will be V> "informally" squezeed from russian LIR's for the good relationship from the RIPN V> side? I can. It always was a favorite habit of some kind of people -- to dream about money in a neighbour's pocket. Was that an argument? Anyway, not so much money as you can imagine. And rather earned, not "squeezed". How about thinking for "If I were Bill Gates..."? Or it is better first to learn something about matters before speaking of them? V> Vladimir. V> Content-Description: Card for Vladimir Lebedev V> begin: vcard V> fn: Vladimir Lebedev V> n: Lebedev;Vladimir V> org: RTS Technical Center V> adr: 15, Chayanova str., bldg. 5;;3rd floor;Moscow;;125267;Russia V> email;internet: wal(a)rtsnet.ru V> title: Technical Director V> tel;work: +7 (095) 733 95 05 V> tel;fax: +7 (095) 733 95 15 V> note: ICQ #: 6857070 V> x-mozilla-cpt: ;0 V> x-mozilla-html: TRUE V> version: 2.1 V> end: vcard V> Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sergey A. Mukhin | violet(a)rosnet.net Network Administrator | http://violet.rosnet.net/ Russian Telecommunications Network | Tel: + 7 095 206 62 15 Moscow, Russia | + 7 095 755 85 88 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * If you can't learn do it well learn to enjoy doing it badly. * ------------------------------------------------------------------------

4 3

Re: [ripe-167] ENOUGH!!!!!!
by Berislav Todorovic 23 Feb '98

23 Feb '98

>> To put it frankly I got utterly bored of that too. Looks like >> a kind of scholastic dispute. >> >> Of course if somebody is still interested it might be continued. >> What people think about that? I'd suggest you to create a local mailing list somewhere in Russia, publish its location and subscription info here on the LIR-WG and transfer all this discussion there. The list should be opened to anyone interested. I hope you'll achieve some solution acceptable for everyone. Best regards, Beri .-------. | --+-- | Berislav Todorovic, B.Sc.E.E. | E-mail: BERI(a)etf.bg.ac.yu | /|\ Hostmaster of the YU TLD | |-(-+-)-| School of Electrical Engineering | Phone: (+381-11) 3221-419 | \|/ Bulevar Revolucije 73 | 3370-106 | --+-- | 11000 Belgrade SERBIA, YUGOSLAVIA | Fax: (+381-11) 3248-681 `-------' --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: [ripe-167] Impressions brought from Moscow meeting
by Sergey A. Mukhin 23 Feb '98

23 Feb '98

>>>>> "A" == Andrew Stesin <stesin(a)gu.net> writes: A> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 12:31:21 +0200 (EET) A> To: "Sergey A. Mukhin" <violet(a)rosnet.net> A> cc: lir-wg(a)ripe.net A> On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Sergey A. Mukhin wrote: S> I'm wondering why Moscovites try to decide something for other people. >> >> Well, I am sorry -- that is an obviuos prerogative of Ukrainians ;-) A> Do you really think that this kinds of comments is appropriate A> here? In no way. What about yours? Anyway, my apologizes to all this list's readers. >> I understand pretty well you do not wish be served by Moscow. I cannot >> understand why so much words out of that ? Who insists on it ? A> Authors of ripe-167, and some other Russian authorities A> (as one can observe from the activities around the issue, A> i.e. during RIPE-29 meeting). Probably you also? A> Mr. Poul-Henning Kamp asked a perfectly reasonable A> question here while asking what's wrong A> with the service provided by RIPE itself: "Lets have a A> show of hands, who couldn't live with this, and why?" A> ("this" means the current state of things). A> Let's take his (very careful, BTW) approach. Ok, A> dear Mr. Sergey A. Mukhin, you (or the *Moscow* company ROSNET A> where you work) rised your hand up, you cannot A> live being served by RIPE directly any more; A> you'd like the whole ex-Roma-Empire (oh sorry, ex-USSR) A> to be served by a new regional registry in Moscow. A> Would you please mind explaining the reasons? Sorry for a bit late response. Rosnet can live and communicate to either RIPE and Internic directly. And many others too. And some would prefer be served in Moscow. On the other hand there is a tendency to a fast growing number of LIRs in the fSU countries and it might make sense for RIPE itself to establish its office or RIR for those who agree to be served there to get load off the main office. ( Not a business of mine, I agree. ) Consider the size of fSU region. Actually more full comments on the RIPE 167 were already given by Alexey Platonov which is one of its authors. A> Who else rises the hand? Mr. Alexey Platonov (Moscow, A> RosNIIROS), and Mr. Anatoly Kramer (Moscow, ??? -- who A> doesn't even aware of what e-mail is, AFAIK) -- two men, A> two Russian semi-governmental organisations, each wants A> to establish a "big registry" in Moscow, and to extend the scope A> of this RIR to adjucent countries, taking away any choice A> of where to be served from those countries. Well, and who was 'contra' except Ukraine? Let us try and see what will follow. We did not mean to gather almost all and ask them move hands here in Moscow. We told all about the whole thing; everybody interested coult present at that meeting. The resume of it was sent to all and we are awaiting for votes "contra". There were no more "contra" yet. A> It seems to me that the whole idea is local to Russia (even A> to Moscow) and has nothing to do with community interests (whatever A> it means). It's some kind of bureacratic intra-Moscow battle... A> My conclusion: A> * I'd like the ripe-167 document in it's current form to A> * be obsoleted. I'd also like a new edition, say ripe-167+ A> * to be issued, with all the current (very weak) argumentation A> * removed, with solid arguments "pro" added, and with authorship A> * more representative than a single man from Moscow. Where A> * is (so hyped) community, anyway? A> If this hypothetic ripe-167+ document either doesn't have A> a really solid argumentation, or doesn't have support A> from the *representative* community, -- then who needs A> all this show? If the scope of interest in a RIR is A> limited to Moscow and Russia -- make it a "Russian National A> Internet Registry" and we Ukrainians just won't care. >> Any people decide most ( or all ) of their own problems theirselves. A> This statement of yours contradicts directly with the A> approach of ripe-167 document. I am afraid you mistreat the approach. >> But sometimes it is better to unite to get the solutions easier. A> Would you mind explaining the benefits of uniting with you, please. A> (Let's note that this last statement of yours has nothing close A> to ripe-167's content at all). No offense: friendship and A> union are different things, aren't they? I meant benefits of uniting .(point) If you suppose uniting of everybody but us, that sounds a bit odd, does not it? Besides, I was not an author of RIPE 167 and anyway can have my own opinion no matter if some documents exist anywhere or not. As for my letters hereabout -- that is my treatment of that a bit vague general document plus a bit of common sense. Plus my point of view, for that matter, and there are people sharing it with me. >> If Ukraine does not want - nobody can insist. Why are you SO bothered >> by the fact somebody else wants ? A> Pretty simple: some people here in Ukraine (me among them) A> have a strong feeling that some Moscow guys want to "unite" A> us with them without taking our opinion into attentions. I am afraid I would never understand such a point of view. We declare free choice for all. Moreover, Ukraine is independent and could you point out the way bad Moscow guys can "unite" it ? Again, that is a union, not a Soviet union;-), everybody has the same rights by definition as well as the choice to unite or get out any time. I think Internet community is democratic enough not to allow such things anyway ( even if Russia ached to "unite" somebody ). >> Yes, thanks God, USSR is already a history. But even now we still >> can see some consequences of the Roma Empire. And as nobody can >> change history of the past we just have to take into consideration >> the facts no matter if we like them or not. A> The fact is: the Soviet Union is dead. Do we need another A> union, called "Russian Union", instead? Oh thanks... maybe A> sometime later, when the benefits of it will be clear A> and obvious, when there will be some interest from *both* sides... A> if there will be any. But not now, please! Well. Do we need RIPE? Let us all make our own internets deep inside. And it's done ;-) (joke) I meant just the following effect of the Soviet Union: 6 years are not enough for a new generation who knows English rather than Russia; not enough to get old communications completely changed. Sure, I am writing the third time here, as you would like! Now or later or never! That is your choice only. As for Russia, we have the situation we need to do things. Already. And we try it. And why to say the whole idea is wrong? Just because somebody does not like it right now ( or even will never like it )? >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Sergey A. Mukhin | violet(a)rosnet.net >> Network Administrator | http://violet.rosnet.net/ >> Russian Telecommunications Network | Tel: + 7 095 206 62 15 >> Moscow, Russia | + 7 095 755 85 88 >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> * If you can't learn do it well learn to enjoy doing it badly. * >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ A> Best regards, A> Andrew Stesin A> nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE Kind regards, -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sergey A. Mukhin | violet(a)rosnet.net Network Administrator | http://violet.rosnet.net/ Russian Telecommunications Network | Tel: + 7 095 206 62 15 Moscow, Russia | + 7 095 755 85 88 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * If you can't learn do it well learn to enjoy doing it badly. * ------------------------------------------------------------------------

6 6

Re: [ripe-167] Impressions brought from Moscow meeting
by Dmitri Bourkov 23 Feb '98

23 Feb '98

-----Original Message----- From: Igor Romanenko <igor(a)office.lucky.net> > >> Association ) takes the control or B) our government does it. > >_Which_ government? Russian? > >> Do you need any more comments ? > >Oh, yea, am I getting you right that in order to deal with your government >you need to take all of FSU with you? (BTW that's what Dima Burkov said >during Moscow meeting). Please, stop interpretation of my words. :-)

1 0

Re: [ripe-167] Impressions brought from Moscow meeting
by Sergey A. Mukhin 23 Feb '98

23 Feb '98

>>>>> "A" == Andrew Stesin <stesin(a)gu.net> writes: A> Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 15:30:14 +0200 (EET) A> To: "Sergey A. Mukhin" <violet(a)rosnet.net> A> cc: lir-wg(a)ripe.net, ncc(a)ripe.net A> On Thu, 19 Feb 1998, Sergey A. Mukhin wrote: >> On the other hand there is a tendency to a fast growing number >> of LIRs in the fSU countries and it might make sense for RIPE >> itself to establish its office or RIR for those who agree A> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ A> "Office" -- no problem, but not "RIR"! How can RIPE A> establish a RIR without an agreement in the community A> of the region served? RIR creation should be A> initiated by the representative community, not RIPE, A> or am I missing something? Quite right. The community does exist and let it decide. Anyway the necessity of either RIR or RIPE office seems to me reasonable. >> to be served there to get load off the main office. ( Not a >> business of mine, I agree. ) Consider the size of fSU region. A> fSU is not a region. Please use non-political A> but geographical terms for defining region borders. I always thought the term "geographical region" makes sense. To pity I am not so good in geography to define something for sure in geographical terms. Let us speak about East Europe and, ugm, some of Asia region. More precisely, about LIRs in that region which found reasonable to unite and get a RIR or RIPE office. Would that do? I would add: regions from fSU countries and to put it frankly do not see why you do not like such a definition. A> Who else rises the hand? Mr. Alexey Platonov (Moscow, A> RosNIIROS), and Mr. Anatoly Kramer (Moscow, ??? -- who A> doesn't even aware of what e-mail is, AFAIK) -- two men, A> two Russian semi-governmental organisations, each wants A> to establish a "big registry" in Moscow, and to extend the scope A> of this RIR to adjucent countries, taking away any choice A> of where to be served from those countries. >> >> Well, and who was 'contra' except Ukraine? A> Ok, but who was present but Russia and Ukraine? A> Russia was "pro", Ukraine was "contra". A> 1:1 It was not necessary to present there physically. The voting system was not Soviet-like. Everybody concerned was noticed and if they sent no votes "contra", they are "pro". I have no precise data -- let us ask people who keep those things running. Besides, if I get things right LIRs were counted, not countries. >> awaiting for votes "contra". There were no more "contra" yet. A> ripe-167 is way too unclear for everyone to get its A> main ideas in a moment. Well, it was available for far more time than a moment. >> >> Any people decide most ( or all ) of their own problems theirselves. >> A> This statement of yours contradicts directly with the A> approach of ripe-167 document. >> >> I am afraid you mistreat the approach. A> I'm afraid that ripe-167 is just very unclear and uncertain A> at this point. Maybe. For that case there are its authors able to clarify details. >> >> But sometimes it is better to unite to get the solutions easier. >> A> Would you mind explaining the benefits of uniting with you, please. A> (Let's note that this last statement of yours has nothing close A> to ripe-167's content at all). No offense: friendship and A> union are different things, aren't they? >> >> I meant benefits of uniting .(point) A> There are some benefits and some losses... Sure. As in any business though. Some people call that "choice". >> If you suppose uniting of >> everybody but us, that sounds a bit odd, does not it? A> I don't like the idea of *any* union with *anyone* until A> it will be though out carefully in all the details A> and everything will be obvious, certain and clear. I think exactly so. :-) Very reasonable. A> Pretty simple: some people here in Ukraine (me among them) A> have a strong feeling that some Moscow guys want to "unite" A> us with them without taking our opinion into attentions. >> >> I am afraid I would never understand such a point of view. We declare >> free choice for all. A> Would you mind pointing me at the written document where A> one can get a clear and certain statement of this? Alas, I can not. Hope somebody else can.clarify that matter. >> I meant just the following effect of the Soviet Union: 6 years are >> not enough for a new generation who knows English rather than >> Russia; not enough to get old communications completely changed. A> Please leave alone this old crap about English/Russian A> language. If you are a LIR (and RIR serves LIRs) you A> ought to know English, point. If you don't know A> English, you are the customer of a LIR where staff A> is more knowlegeable. A> Agreed? No. Ideally everybody which has an Internet connectivity should know English. You ( or I ) may say, `ought' as many times as we'd like -- and nothing will change. >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Sergey A. Mukhin | violet(a)rosnet.net >> Network Administrator | http://violet.rosnet.net/ >> Russian Telecommunications Network | Tel: + 7 095 206 62 15 >> Moscow, Russia | + 7 095 755 85 88 >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> * If you can't learn do it well learn to enjoy doing it badly. * >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> A> Best regards, A> Andrew Stesin A> nic-hdl: ST73-RIPE -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sergey A. Mukhin | violet(a)rosnet.net Network Administrator | http://violet.rosnet.net/ Russian Telecommunications Network | Tel: + 7 095 206 62 15 Moscow, Russia | + 7 095 755 85 88 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * If you can't learn do it well learn to enjoy doing it badly. * ------------------------------------------------------------------------

4 3

Re: [ripe-167] ENOUGH!!!!!!
by Sergey A. Mukhin 23 Feb '98

23 Feb '98

To put it frankly I got utterly bored of that too. Looks like a kind of scholastic dispute. Think both positions are clear enough ( for about a week already ) and no further discussion makes sense -- it would be just time wasting. Of course if somebody is still interested it might be continued. What people think about that? As for my position there left just one thing which needs to be clarified -- about the language matter. There is a trivial programming approach -- if we have to join a bit non-standard thing ( Russian language for this case ) to the whole object ( Registry ) it seems worth enough to create an interface between them ( a RIR or office ) till the incompatibility gets fixed ( everybody knows English okay ). Usually such an interface is hidden and makes no trouble for the whole thing just slightly slowing local communications. >>>>> "P" == Peppino Anselmi <peppo(a)inet.it> writes: P> To: violet(a)rosnet.net (Sergey A. Mukhin) P> Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 18:34:04 +0100 (MET) P> Cc: wal(a)rtsnet.ru, lir-wg(a)ripe.net, joker(a)rtsnet.ru, ant(a)rtsnet.ru, igor(a)rtsnet.ru >> P> I collected more than 100 mail about your quarrels. P> Now I got bored by all that spamming. P> Senders of these mail are always the same: why don't you write each other P> without flooding half Europe? P> Thanks in advance P> Regards P> Peppino Anselmi -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sergey A. Mukhin | violet(a)rosnet.net Network Administrator | http://violet.rosnet.net/ Russian Telecommunications Network | Tel: + 7 095 206 62 15 Moscow, Russia | + 7 095 755 85 88 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * If you can't learn do it well learn to enjoy doing it badly. * ------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0