From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 107f24,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid107f24,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-22 02:55:40 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!chcgil2-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!news.binc.net!kilgallen
From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.functional
Subject: Re: How Ada could have prevented the Red Code distributed denial of
 service attack.
Date: 22 Aug 2001 04:54:45 -0500
Organization: LJK Software
Message-ID: <0sDnZRVkz5qL@eisner.encompasserve.org>
References: <bebbba07.0107292308.d1192fc@posting.google.com>
  <slrn9ma7qp.nac.randhol@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
  <3B6555ED.9B0B0420@sneakemail.com> <87n15lxzzv.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
 <yecofq03kih.fsf@king.cts.com> <3B672322.B5EA1B66@home.com>
 <ppsemtojqkqsqpfvj1th3mae8b4vu1tg89@4ax.com>
 <4a885870.0108112341.7ce02ac0@posting.google.com>
 <3B834E5D.B0D26AB1@adaworks.com> <9lvsic$bet9s$1@ID-9852.news.dfncis.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org
X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 998473682 29332 192.135.80.34 (22 Aug 2001
 09:48:02 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:48:02 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:12210 comp.lang.c:76063
 comp.lang.c++:84776 comp.lang.functional:7608
Date: 2001-08-22T04:54:45-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <9lvsic$bet9s$1@ID-9852.news.dfncis.de>, "Joachim Durchholz" <joachim_d@gmx.de> writes:
> Richard Riehle <richard@adaworks.com> wrote:
>>
>> The U.S. Navy is discovering just how horrid NT is
>> after towing ships back to port because of failures.
> 
> Could you share a reference to a report? The "more official", the better
> (there are people who need convincing).

I was under the impression that despite the troubles in the press reports,
the Navy was taking a full-steam-ahead attitude toward greater dependence
on Windows NT for such mission-critical roles.