Re: RE: Palladium (TCP/MS)

To: ietf at ietf.org
Subject: Re: RE: Palladium (TCP/MS)
From: Christopher Evans <teknopup at bigvalley.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:20:33 -0800
In-reply-to: <03AEC69766E56C41B535148ECBE87C67023C58@mm_w2k1.micromedical.local>
Organization: http://digitalatoll.flnet.org/
Sender: owner-ietf at ietf.org

.net is a suite of coding & publishing tools.  maybe should throw together a .org 
suite of freeware coding tools?  


10/29/02 2:54:02 AM, "Sean Jones" <sean.jones at micromedical.co.uk> wrote:

>Good Morning  Valdis
>I have been cogitating on this for a little while. (Especially as I didn't want to 
sound thick when replying)
>
>Why would MS (or anyone for that matter) want multiple pointer records when one 
will suffice. My thoughts revolved around clustered servers, .net & etc In short 
the Microsoft-verse.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: RE: Palladium (TCP/MS)
  - From: Lloyd Wood

References:
- RE: Palladium (TCP/MS)
  - From: Sean Jones

Prev by Date: Re: Palladium (TCP/MS)
Next by Date: Re: RE: Palladium (TCP/MS)
Previous by thread: Re: Palladium (TCP/MS)
Next by thread: Re: RE: Palladium (TCP/MS)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: RE: Palladium (TCP/MS)

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.