Subject: Re: pppoe problem
To: Martin Husemann <martin@duskware.de>
From: Ignatios Souvatzis <ignatios@theory.cs.uni-bonn.de>
List: tech-net
Date: 12/19/2001 13:04:31
--GRPZ8SYKNexpdSJ7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 01:02:30PM +0100, Martin Husemann wrote:
> > Well - they have to somehow account by time, and runnning PPP over
> > $somethingsick is the easiest solution, I guess...
>=20
> Yes, but accounting valid lease time would be OK too I guess.
>=20
> Anyway, why would they care? Everyone else, besides the insignificant
> amount of their users running NetBSD on a NAT router, is happy with
> their service (more or less).
>=20
> So why should they fix something that ain't visibly broken - even if it is
> broken by objective terms?

I thought you said it is not broken?

	-is

--GRPZ8SYKNexpdSJ7
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i

iQEVAgUBPCCCSjCn4om+4LhpAQG3BAgAh6kSf69NFxqr+M8f4i6oLsHdKUZeR8vC
fCvxXTfcw+DK+i0z88EMXo6Z15UViTw7+VBIzmA7aeOBud6i+Cwgo1WZmJ6pbZmD
P2d8LTeSTwGtgzWK2HNA541jGkM6U40SmyxhfkI+Na/zV4xbXXRerazJwlBX1y6x
811vGh7QEg8EC35vz/MrQI+jJTW3jK1B+epo4B60vGcOYLZpqI77X/hD+JTiFZBs
oIx4E8EEEw1CqetZzwhH2o1SJoawPH3zkhrm+7kld/MPj6vjMv6zfqeTlA7iDtjw
WLm3qiHHgmrkMlhSC5Rh1Xs1X4ntwLNC96Df6EBzr2Ogy5PYkGcMeQ==
=O/e8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--GRPZ8SYKNexpdSJ7--