https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/379628100
Job Title:Telecommunications Policy and Technology Specialist (Internet)
Agency:Federal Communications Commission
SALARY RANGE:
$124,995.00 to $157,100.00 / Per Year
DUTIES:
As Telecommunications Policy and Technology Specialist (Internet),
Would it not help if RIPE un-publishes these ASN's from their whois database ?
I filed the abuse report at RIPE but haven't heard back from them. We
are NOT a RIPE member but an APNIC member.
Regards
-Tarun
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 3:49 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 12:47 PM
Hi Tarun
Not really. People who are filtering route are filtering already since only
you have route object for it and people who are not filtering, for them
RIPE DB and whois won't matter.
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Tarun Dua wrote:
> Would it not help if RIPE un-publishes these ASN's
On (2014-09-01 14:58 +0530), Tarun Dua wrote:
Hi,
> Would it not help if RIPE un-publishes these ASN's from their whois database ?
>
> I filed the abuse report at RIPE but haven't heard back from them. We
> are NOT a RIPE member but an APNIC member.
Not sure against what RIPE rule it would be a
see also:
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/09/iran-3g-phones-filter-unsanitary-water.html#
restated slightly, video, the primary vehicle for porn, needs minders,
text, the primary vehicle for ideas, does not.
-e
On 8/31/14 11:08 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
well, looking at
Will applications without a cancelled check for at least 100k in
"donations" be considered?
Nick
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 3:19 AM, Joly MacFie wrote:
> https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/379628100
>
> Job Title:Telecommunications Policy and Technology Specialist (Internet)
>
> Agency:Fede
Of couse such applications will be accepted. However, applicants are warned
that failure to include a donation will require alternate verification of the
requisite lack of morals and ethics.
>Will applications without a cancelled check for at least 100k in
>"donations" be considered?
>
>On Mon
If you have ties to Grand Ayatollah, it would probably be an automatic
acceptance into the position.
Grant
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 1, 2014, at 1:24 PM, "Keith Medcalf" wrote:
>
>
> Of couse such applications will be accepted. However, applicants are warned
> that failure to include a
>> Loose mode RPKI:
>> - verified or unknown less-specific route is preferable to failing
>> more-specific
>Or said otherwise when choosing route from Adj-RIBs-In to Loc-RIB longest
>match is not done to whole population, population is first divided to
>'verified', 'unknown' and 'failed' routes,
Members
I have few questions related to Multicast deployment in the internet today.
1: Does all the ISP's provide Multicast Routing by default?
2: Is there any placeholder where one can get to know the Multicast Internet
Route table (usage, stability etc) just like Unicast Route table
(http:
What value of shares in major telecommunications companies would be
considered adequate for such a role?
On 2 Sep 2014 09:30, "Grant Ridder" wrote:
> If you have ties to Grand Ayatollah, it would probably be an automatic
> acceptance into the position.
>
> Grant
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On S
On (2014-09-01 21:34 +), Sriram, Kotikalapudi wrote:
Hi Sriram,
Please help me understand the argument.
> Some Org. D can maliciously announce a subprefix under Org. C's prefix,
> and get away with it due to the 'Loose' mode.
So C is advertising valid 192.0.2.0/24
Is D advertising valid 192
12 matches
Mail list logo
