RE: What's the policy on hardware failures?

From: Jim Dixon (JDixon@communigroup.com)
Date: Mon Oct 21 2002 - 12:30:50 GMT-3


Bring out yer Failed! :) <CLANK!> MEOWWWW!-whump, REAAAAAAOOOOWWW-whump,

You'll be stone dead in a moment.

Referring to the swallow's cargo capacity, I can find no RFC relating to ,
the type of cargo, where it grips the cargo, or the weight ratios between
African and European Swallows.

Would anyone care to point me to another reference where I may find such
answers to my questions three? :)

-----Original Message-----
From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:hcb@gettcomm.com]
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 09:30
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: What's the policy on hardware failures?

At 10:40 AM +0100 10/21/02, Rah Hussain wrote:
>Howard,
>
>LOL
>
>I thinks u have been watching way too much Monty Python or John Cleese must
>now be working as a Cisco proctor.
>
>-Rah

Is there such a thing as too much Monty Python, given
network-relevant observations such as the most important machine in
the hospital goes ping?

What's wrong with John Cleese as a proctor?

Is it true there will be a new CCIE test center in Notlob?

And when it comes to determining the velocity of different kinds of
sparrows, I point to the IETF:

   RFC2549: IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service. D. Waitzman.
     Apr-01-1999. (Updates RFC1149)



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Nov 05 2002 - 08:35:52 GMT-3