From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Mon Jun 21 2004 - 13:37:54 GMT-3
Fortunately, not a runt either. :) (Or a martian depending on the involved
encapsulation)
Hmmm... I think that Cheney would enlist haliburton to rewrite the RFC so
that the BDR had a pre-empt capability during perceived times of failure.
I'm not entirely sure whether that would improve the stability or not!
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Howard C. Berkowitz
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 12:12 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com; security@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: RE: Congratulations Scott Morris (Is this a technical discus
ssion???)
At 11:50 AM -0400 6/21/04, Scott Morris wrote:
>Aren't we supposed to avoid intense political or philosophical
>discussions on this list??? :)
I predict your child processed has been dampened, or will be soon, and will
require re-encapsulation. Diapers are a tunneling protocol for baby
payloads (as opposed to 802.3 baby giants, unless it's a very big child
process)
>
>The lab may ask you to do something dumb. But if it's the dumb thing
>they want, then you do it!
>
>Just because 20 million people believe in a dumb idea, it's still a dumb
>idea... :)
Obviously demonstrated by a significant number of those who do get elected.
Alternatively, a number of incumbents demonstrate the lab concept that when
you are faced with two evils, not doing things by best practice or doing
things the Cisco way, the lesser of the two evils, in context, is the Cisco
thing. In your professional life, continue to remember context.
DR election is so much clearer than Presidential election. I wonder how Dick
Cheney would feel if he were told he was a BDR?
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>Howard C. Berkowitz
>Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 11:14 AM
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com; security@groupstudy.com
>Subject: RE: RE: Congratulations Scott Morris (Is this a technical
>discus
>ssion???)
>
>At 10:10 AM -0500 6/21/04, Jason Graun wrote:
>>Ahmad, you and Howard are correct to wrongs don't make a right, I did
>>get too belligerent and was not thinking when I wrote the e-mail. I
>>would like to apologize.
>>
>>Jason
>>
>
>Perhaps to calm things a bit, and be vaguely on topic, two wrong
>protocol configurations, in the context of best real-world practices,
>often are exactly the answer expected on the CCIE lab.
>
>:-)
>
>There is a mantra or koan here: "Do these two wrongs make a Cisco right?"
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jul 03 2004 - 19:40:46 GMT-3