And so on. If some product is not 100% Y2K ready, it does not mean it can't work
in 2000 year. And vice versa, btw.may be, someone from nanog have some statistic showing how people are stopping
to use old ripe181 server and begin to use new one? If really a few use old
interface, I apologize.
More to the point, if there's such a Y2k problem with this
software/protocol/format, then why aren't RIPE (the original authors)
running around changing to RPSL?
Simon
I'v checked a more docs; may be I was wrong because 90% of this programs
requested whois data are not sesitive to the RIPE181-RPSL data change.
If so, sorry.
Alex.
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 20:28:46 +0000
From: Simon Lockhart <simonl@rd.bbc.co.uk>
To: Alex P. Rudnev <alex@virgin.relcom.eu.net>
Cc: Gerald Andrew Winters <gerald@merit.edu>, irrd-team@merit.edu,
nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: RPSL announcement text
>And so on. If some product is not 100% Y2K ready, it does not mean it can't work
>in 2000 year. And vice versa, btw.
>
>may be, someone from nanog have some statistic showing how people are stopping
>to use old ripe181 server and begin to use new one? If really a few use old
>interface, I apologize.More to the point, if there's such a Y2k problem with this
software/protocol/format, then why aren't RIPE (the original authors)
running around changing to RPSL?Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | Tel: +44 (0)1737 839676
Internet Engineering Manager | Fax: +44 (0)1737 839516
BBC Internet Services | Email: Simon.Lockhart@bbc.co.uk
Kingswood Warren,Tadworth,Surrey,UK | URL: http://support.bbc.co.uk/
Aleksei Roudnev,
(+1 415) 585-3489 /San Francisco CA/
the operational issue is not y2k this or that. the issue for ops folk is
that it is a change being made during what is anticipated to be the worst
part of the the y2k window which could be made some other time. this means
that, if it is visible in any way, it can be confused with y2k symptoms thus
adding to real operators' (as opposed to nanog posters') debugging problems
at what may be a bad time.
randy
Simon,