text:
Judge denies request to strike down school mask requirement
By UNB! Network on November 3, 2020 • ( Leave a comment )
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — A Connecticut judge has rejected an emergency request to strike down the state requirement that children wear masks in schools to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, saying there is little evidence backing some parents' claims that mask-wearing can be harmful.
Judge Thomas Moukawsher in Hartford issued the ruling Monday in a lawsuit filed by the Connecticut Freedom Alliance and several parents and children. He said the case will proceed under normal procedures and he is considering the state's request to dismiss the case.
An epidemiologist and psychiatrist testified for the plaintiffs at a hearing Friday. But Moukawsher said their testimony did not prove the lawsuit's claims.
"There is no emergency danger to children from wearing masks in schools," the judge wrote in his decision. "Indeed, there is very little evidence of harm at all and a wide ranging medical consensus that it is safe."
Doug Dubitsky, a lawyer for the plaintiffs and a Republican state representative from Chaplin, argues that studies show wearing masks is not effective in preventing transmission of diseases and can cause children to develop a variety of conditions including nasal infections, tooth infections, panic attacks, breathing problems and acne.
Dubitsky said many parents have pulled their children out of school because of mask-related problems.
The state argues it is following federal guidelines and studies show masks are important in helping prevent the virus from traveling into the air and spreading from one person to another.
Categories: News, News/Politics, U.S. News, UNB! News New England
Tagged as: Connecticut, COVID-19
Arizona's coronavirus death toll passes 6,000
Canada's top public health doctor now recommends 3-layer non-medical masks


text:
Q: Dividing stream network of specified lengths in ArcGIS for Desktop?
we are trying to find hydro power potential of river basin by using ArcGis and SWAT ,we have created stream network ,but unable to divide stream network at 500mts interval, unable to find the tool

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
[Search] [txt|pdfized|bibtex] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Nits]
Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12        IPR declarations
Internet Draft                               Alia Atlas, Ed (Avici Systems)
Expires: March 2005
Loop-Free Alternates for IP/LDP Local Protection
draft-ietf-rtgwg-ipfrr-spec-base-00.txt
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable
patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed,
or will be disclosed, and any of which I become aware will be
disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668.
material or to cite them other than as ``work in progress.''
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
This document defines an architecture and selection process for
providing local protection for IP unicast and/or LDP traffic in the
event of a single link or node failure until the router has
converged.  When computing the primary next-hop for a prefix, a
router S also determines an alternate next-hop which can be used if
the primary next-hop fails.  The alternate next-hop is said to be a
loop-free alternate, which goes to a neighbor whose shortest path to
the prefix does not go back through the router S.
Atlas et al.                                                    [Page 1]
Internet Draft                                                March 2005
1  Introduction  .................................................  2
2  Terminology  ..................................................  4
3  Finding an Alternate  .........................................  5
3.1  Loop-Free Alternates  .......................................  6
3.2  Selection of an Alternate  ..................................  7
3.2.1  Failure Scenarios  ........................................  7
3.2.2  Broadcast and NBMA Interfaces  ............................  9
3.2.3  Interactions wtih ISIS Overload, RFC 3137
and Costed Out Links  .....................................  9
3.2.4  Characterization of Neighbors  ............................ 10
3.2.5  Selection Procedure  ...................................... 10
4  Using an Alternate  ........................................... 11
5  Requirements on LDP Mode  ..................................... 11
6  Routing Aspects  .............................................. 12
6.1  Multiple-Region Routing  .................................... 12
6.1.1  Inheriting Alternate Next-Hops with One Primary Neighbor  . 14
6.1.2  OSPF Inter-Area Routes  ................................... 15
6.1.4  ISIS Multi-Level Routing  ................................. 15
6.2  OSPF Virtual Links  ......................................... 15
6.3  BGP Next-Hop Synchronization  ............................... 16
6.4  Multicast Considerations  ................................... 16
7  Security Considerations  ...................................... 16
8  Full Copyright Statement  ..................................... 17
9  References  ................................................... 17
10 Authors Information  .......................................... 18
11 Editor's Information  ......................................... 19
Appendix A  Loop-Free Alternate Proofs  .......................... 19
Appendix A.1  Loop-Free Node-Protecting Alternate Proofs  ........ 21
Applications for interactive multimedia services such as VoIP and
pseudo-wires can be very sensitive to traffic loss, such as occurs
when a link or router in the network fails.  A router's convergence
time is generally on the order of seconds; the application traffic
may be sensitive to losses greater than 10s of milliseconds.
As discussed in [FRAMEWORK], minimizing traffic loss requires a
mechanism for the router adjacent to a failure rapidly invoke a
repair path, which is minimally affected by any subsequent re-
convergence.  This document describes such a mechanism which allows a
router whose local link has failed to forward traffic to a pre-
computed alternate until the router installs the new primary next-
hops based upon the changed network topology.
When a local link fails, a router currently must signal the event to
its neighbors via the IGP, recompute new primary next-hops for all
affected prefixes, and only then install those new primary next-hops
into the forwarding plane. Until the new primary next-hops are
installed, traffic directed towards the affected prefixes is
discarded.  This process can take seconds.
/__
\     +-----+
/------|  S  |--\
/       +-----+   \
/ 5               8 \
/                     \
+-----+                +-----+
|  P  |                | N_1 |
\                     /
\   \  4              3 /  /
\|  \                 / |/
-+   \    +-----+    /  +-
\---|  D  |---/
Figure 1: Basic Topology
The goal of IP/LDP Local Protection is to reduce that traffic
convergence time to 10s of milliseconds by using a pre-computed
alternate interface, in the event that the currently selected primary
interface fails, so that the alternate can be rapidly used when the
failure is detected.
To clarify the behavior of IP/LDP Local Protection, consider the
simple topology in Figure 1.  When router S computes its shortest
path to router D, router S determines to use the interface to router
P as its primary next-hop.  Without IP/LDP Local Protection, that
interface is the only next-hop that router S computes to reach D.
With IP/LDP Local Protection, S also looks for an alternate next-hop
interface to use.  In this example, S would determine that it could
send traffic destined to D by using the interface to router N_1 and
therefore S would install the interface to N_1 as its alternate
next-hop.  At some later time, the link between router S and router P
could fail.  When that link fails, S (and most likely P) will be the
first to detect it.  On detecting the failure, S will stop sending
traffic destined for D towards P via the failed link, and instead
send the traffic to S's pre-computed alternate next-hop, which is the
interface to N_1, until a new SPF is run and its results are
installed.  As with the primary next-hop, an alternate next-hop is
computed for each destination.  The process of computing an alternate
next-hop does not alter the primary next-hop computed via a standard
SPF.  The alternate next-hop can protect against a single link or
node failure.
If in the example of Figure 1, the link cost from N_1 to D increased
to 30 from 3, then N_1 would not be a loop-free alternate, because
the cost of the path from N_1 to D via S would be 17 while the cost
from N_1 directly to D would be 30.   In real networks, we may often
face this situation.  The existence of a suitable loop-free alternate
next-hop is topology dependent.
2. Terminology
SPT --- Shortest Path Tree
D --- The destination router under discussion.
S --- The source router under discussion. It is the viewpoint from
which IP/LDP Local Protection is described.
P --- The router which is the primary next-hop neighbor to get from S
to D. Where there is an ECMP set for the shortest path from S
to D, these will be referred to as P_1, P_2, etc.
N_i --- The ith neighbor of S
R_i_j --- The jth neighbor of N_i, the ith neighbor of S.
Distance_!S(N_i, D) --- The distance of the shortest path from N_i to
D which does not go through router S.
Distance_opt(A, B) --- The distance of the shortest path from A to B.
Reverse Distance of a node X --- This is the Distance_opt(X, S).
Loop-Free Alternate --- This is a next-hop that is not a primary
next-hop whose shortest path to the destination from the
alternate neighbor does not go back through the router S.
This is also known as a downstream path or a feasible
alternate.
Downstream Path --- This is a loop-free alternate.
Link(A->B) --- A link connecting router A to router B.
____\   This is an arrow indicating the primary next-hop towards D.
@@@@\   This is an arrow indicating the alternate next-hop towards D
Primary Neighbor --- One or more of the primary next-hops for S to
reach the destination D goes directly to this neighbor.
Loop-Free Neighbor --- A Neighbor N_i which is not the primary
neighbor and whose shortest path to D does not go through S.
Loop-Free Node-Protecting Alternate --- This is a path via a Loop-
Free Neighbor N_i which does not go through the particular
primary neighbor of S which is being protected to reach the
destination D.
Loop-Free Link-Protecting Alternate --- This is a path via a Loop-
Free Neighbor N_i which does go through the particular primary
neighbor of S which is being protected to reach the destination
Upstream Forwarding Loop --- This is a forwarding loop which involves
a set of routers, none of which are directly connected to the
link which has caused the topology change that triggered a new
SPF in any of the routers.
3. Finding an Alternate
As with primary next-hops, an alternate next-hop is discussed in
relation to a particular destination router D.   For this discussion,
the following terminology, as described earlier and  illustrated in
Figure 2, will be used.
In IP routing, a router S can join the shortest path tree (SPT) at
exactly one point -- itself.  A loop-free alternate next-hop allows
traffic from S to D to deviate from the SPT and then rejoin it.  For
instance, if S were to send traffic destined for D to N_1 instead of
P, thereby deviating from the SPT, then when N_1 received it, N_1
would send that traffic along its shortest path to D.
\          /    _| R_2 |
+-----+__    \|     |/    / +-----+
| N_3 |  \   -+     +- __/       \
+-----+   \____       /           \
\             \     /             \
\             +-----+             \
\           _| N_2 |              \
|       __/ +-----+               \
\     /         \                 |
\   /     /     \_               |
+-----+   |/        \              |
|  S  |   +-         \  +-----+    |
+-----+               \_| R_1 |    |
/    /   \                  +-----+    |
|/    /     \                  /         |
+-   /       \                /          |
/       +-----+          /   /       |
+-----+/        | N_1 |         /  |/        |
|  P  |         +-----+        /   +-        |
+-----+            \          /             /
\             \  \__      /             /
\   \             \|   \    /             /
\|  \            -+    +-----+          /
-+   \_________________|  D  |---------/
Figure 2:  Topology for Terminology
3.1. Loop-Free Alternates
With loop-free alternates, the goal is to expand the set of points at
which S can cause its traffic to join the SPT.  To illustrate this
let's first consider S's neighbors.  Router S has the ability to send
traffic to any one of its neighbors N_i; this is the easiest possible
deviation from the SPT that S can cause to happen.  Thus, all of
router S's neighbors are candidate alternates at which S could cause
traffic to rejoin the SPT.  However, it is not useful for router S to
use a next-hop which results in traffic rejoining the SPT upstream of
S, such that the traffic will transit S again.  This would cause a
loop.  Avoiding a loop is thus the first constraint imposed on the
alternate next-hop.  In Figure 2, S's neighbors N_2 and N_3 are not
loop-free alternate neighbors.
A next-hop which goes to a neighbor that does not have a loop back to
S and is not the primary next-hop may be selected as an alternate
next-hop.  In Figure 2, that is the case for S's neighbor N_1.  N_1
is referred to as a loop-free alternate with respect to traffic
flowing from S to D  because there is no loop caused by forwarding
traffic for D to N_1.
An algorithm run on router S must be able to determine which
neighbors provide loop-free alternates.  By running an SPF
computation from S's perspective, router S can determine the distance
from a neighbor N_i to the destination D for the optimal path that
does not go through S.  This is referred to as Distance_!S(N_i, D).
If a neighbor N_i is a loop-free alternate, then it must be cheaper
(a lower metric) to get to the destination D without returning to S.
This gives the following requirement, where Distance_opt(A, B) gives
the distance of the optimal path from A to B.
Distance_!S(N_i, D) < Distance_opt(N_i, S) + Distance_opt(S, D)
Equation 1: Criteria for a Loop-Free Alternate
To check this equation, we can consider the other conditions where
this is not true.  Recall that a router will take the shortest path
to a destination that it can see.  Thus, if Distance_!S(N_i, D) >
Distance_opt(N_i, S) + Distance_opt(S, D), then router N_i will,
based on its own shortest path computations, determine to send
traffic destined for D to S.  Similarly, if Distance_!S(N_i, D) =
Distance_opt(N_i, S) + Distance_opt(S, D), then router N_i has equal
cost paths to the destination D where one or more of those paths go
through S.  In such a case where a router N_i has an ECMP set to
reach the destination and one or more paths go through S, then the
router N_i cannot provide a loop-free alternate because some traffic
destined to D may be sent back to S by N_i.
3.2. Selection of an Alternate
The selection of the alternate to use depends upon the failure
scenario for which the protection is intended.  As with other
protection mechanisms, the alternate selected will protect against
only a single failure.  It is possible to protect against a node
failure, which appears as correlated link failures, by explicitly
selecting a loop-free alternate which does not use that node.
3.2.1 Failure Scenarios
The simplest case is to locate an alternate which protects against a
link failure.
A loop-free link-protecting alternate may cause traffic looping in
the event of a node failure.  This issue is illustrated in Figure 3.
If Link(S->P) fails, then the link-protecting alternate via N will
work correctly.  However, if router P fails, then both S and N will
detect a failure and switch to their alternates.  In this example,
that would cause S to redirect the traffic to N and N to redirect the
traffic to S and thus causing a forwarding loop.  Such a scenario can
arise because the key assumption, that all other routers in the
network are forwarding based upon the shortest path, is violated
because of a second simultaneous correlated failure - another link
connected to the same primary neighbor.
\   @@@
@@@   \
+-----+  /    +-----+
|  S  |-------|  N  |
+-+---+   5   +-----+
|              |
| 5          5 |  |
|  |              | \|/
\|/ |              |
|    +-----+   |
+----|  P  |---+
+--+--+
|  D  |
Figure 3: Link-Protecting Alternates Causing Loop on Node Failure
Such a scenario may be a concern if node failure is not otherwise
protected against.
One way to solve such an issue is to add a constraint that the loop-
free alternate is loop-free with respect to P and the destination.
This gives a loop-free node-protecting alternate.  An alternate will
be node-protecting if it doesn't go through the same primary neighbor
as the primary next-hop.  This is the case if Equation 2 is true,
where N is the neighbor providing a loop-free alternate.
Distance_opt(N, D) < Distance_opt(N, P) + Distance_opt(P, D)
However unlike Equation 1, where if the equation did not hold, the neighbor
wasn't loop-free, if Equation 2 does not hold, the neighbor may still
provide a loop-free alternate that is not node-protecting.  In the
case of ECMP, the neighbor may even provide a node-protecting loop-
free alternate, but S cannot determine this.
It may also be desirable to find an alternate which can protect
against other correlated failures.  In the general case, these are
handled by shared risk link groups (SRLGs) where any links in the
network can belong to the SRLG.  General SRLGs may add unacceptably
to the computational complexity of finding a loop-free alternate.
However, a sub-category of SRLGs is of interest and can be applied
only during the selection of an acceptable alternate.  This sub-
category is to express correlated failures of links which are
connected to the same router.  For example, if there are multiple
logical sub-interfaces on the same physical interface, such as VLANs
on an Ethernet interface, if multiple interfaces use the same
physical port because of channelization, or if multiple interfaces
share a correlated failure because they are on the same line-card.
This sub-category of SRLGs will be referred to as local-SRLGs.  A
local-SRLG has all of its member links with one end connected to the
same router.  Thus, router S could select a loop-free alternate which
does not use a link in the same local-SRLG as the primary next-hop.
The local-SRLGs belonging to P can be protected against via node-
protection; i.e. picking a loop-free node-protecting alternate.
3.2.2 Broadcast and NBMA Interfaces
The computation for node-protection and link-protection is a bit more
complicated for broadcast interfaces.  In an SPF computation, a
broadcast interface is represented as a pseudo-node with links of 0
cost exiting the pseudo-node.  For an alternate to be considered
link-protecting, it must avoid the pseudo-node.  Thus, a potential
alternate which doesn't avoid the next node on the primary path
cannot be used as an alternate if the next node on the path is a
pseudo-node because the potential alternate would use the link that
may fail.  Additionally, an alternate which would normally be termed
node-protecting because it avoided the next node on the primary path
may be only link-protecting.  If the alternate avoids the pseudo-node
but goes through the next node on the path (i.e. the real neighbor of
S), then the alternate is link-protecting; if the alternate avoids
not only the pseudo-node but the following node on the primary path,
then the alternate is node-protecting.
3.2.3 Interactions with ISIS Overload, RFC 3137 and Costed Out Links
As described in RFC 3137, there are cases where it is desirable not
to have a router used as a transit node.  For those cases, it is also
desirable not to have the router used on an alternate path.
For computing an alternate, a router MUST not consider diverting from
the SPF tree along a link whose reverse cost is LSInfinity (for OSPF)
or whose router has the overload bit set (for ISIS).
In the case of OSPF, if all links from router S to a neighbor N_i
have a reverse cost of LSInfinity, then router S cannot consider
using N_i as an alternate.
Similarly in the case of ISIS, if N_i has the overload bit set, then
S cannot consider using N_i as an alternate.
This preserves the desired behavior of diverting traffic away from a
router which is following RFC 3137 and it also preserves the desired
behavior when an operator sets the cost of a link to LSInfinity for
maintenance, of not permitting traffic across that link unless there
is no other path.
If a link or router which is costed out was the only possible
alternate to protect traffic from a particular router S to a
particular destination, then there will be no alternate provided for
3.2.4 Characterization of Neighbors
Each neighbor N_i can be categorized as to the type of path it can
provide to a particular destination D.  Once the primary paths paths
have been determined and removed from consideration, each neighbor
can be characterized as providing a path in one of the following
categories for a particular destination D.  It is possible for a
neighbor to provide both the primary path and a loop-free link-
protecting alternate.  The path through the neighbor N_i is either a:
Loop-Free Node-Protecting Alternate - not a primary path and the
path avoids both S, one of S's primary neighbors on the path to
D and the interface connecting S to that primary neighbor.
Loop-Free Link-Protecting Alternate - not a primary path and the
path avoids S and an interface connecting S to one of S's
primary neighbors, but goes through that primary neighbor on the
path to D.  Note that some neighbors of this type may have ECMP
paths to reach the destination, where some of those paths are
independent of the primary neighbor.
Unavailable - because the path goes through S to reach D,
because the interface to reach the neighbor is costed out, etc.
3.2.5 Selection Procedure
Once the neighbors have been categorized, a selection can be made.
The selection should maximize the failure cases which can be
Atlas et al.                                                   [Page 10]
The selection procedure depends on whether S has a single primary
neighbor or multiple primary neighbors.  A node S is defined to have
a single primary neighbor only if there are no equal cost paths that
go through any other neighbor; i.e., a node S cannot be considered to
have a single primary neighbor just because S does not support ECMP.
If S has a single primary neighbor, then S SHOULD select a loop-free
node-protecting alternate, if one is available.  If none is
available, then S MAY select a loop-free link-protecting alternate.
If S has multiple primary neighbors, then S should select an
alternate to protect against the failure of each of the primary
next-hops.  The loop-free alternate selected should be either one of
the other primary next-hops or should provide node-protection.
4. Using an Alternate
If an alternate is available, it is used to redirect traffic when the
primary next-hop has failed.
When a local interface failure is detected, traffic that was destined
to go out the failed interface must be redirected to the appropriate
alternate next-hops.  The alternate next-hop is pre-computed to be
the most appropriate as mentioned in the selection criteria in the
event of the failure scenario being protected against (i.e. link or
node failure).
IP/LDP Local Protection does not require any mechanisms for the
detection of the failure.  The same mechanisms that enable RSVP-TE
Fast-Reroute can work here.  Because the alternate next-hop is pre-
computed, it should be extremely fast to switch traffic to use it,
exactly as is the case with RSVP-TE Fast-Reroute.
5. Requirements on LDP Mode
Since LDP traffic will follow the path specified by the IGP, it is
also possible for the LDP traffic to follow the loop-free alternates
indicated by the IGP.  To do so, it is necessary for LDP to have the
appropriate labels available for the alternate so that the
appropriate out-segments can be installed in the forwarding plane
before the failure occurs.
This means that a Label Switched Router (LSR) running LDP must
distribute its labels for the FECs it can provide to all its
neighbors, regardless of whether or not they are upstream.
Additionally, LDP must be acting in liberal label retention mode so
that the labels which correspond to interfaces that aren't currently
the primary next-hop are stored.  Similarly, LDP should be in
downstream unsolicited mode, so that the labels for the FEC are
distributed other than along the SPT.
If these requirements are met, then LDP can use the loop-free
alternates without requiring any targeted sessions or signaling
extensions for this purpose.
6. Routing Aspects
An SPF-like computation is run for each topology, which corresponds
to a particular OSPF area or ISIS level.  The IGP needs to determine
the inheritance of loop-free alternates, as determined for singly
advertised routes, to multiply advertised routes, for protocols such
as BGP and LDP and for inter-area or inter-level routes.  These
alternates are provided to LDP and BGP for forwarding purposes only;
the alternates are not redistributed in any fashion into other
protocols.
The alternate next-hop inheritance is described in the context of
inter-area routes, but applies equally well to BGP routes and to
routes which are advertised by multiple routers in the IGP area.
6.1 Multiple-Region Routing
Routes in different regions inherit their primary next-hops from the
border routers (area border routers (ABRs) or level boundary routers)
which offer the shortest path to the destination(s) announcing the
route.  Similarly, routes must inherit their alternate next-hop and
will do so from the same border routers.  The shortest path to an
inter-region route may be learned from a single border router.  In
that case, both the primary and the alternate next-hops can be
inherited from that border router.  Figure 4 illustrates this case
where D is reached via ABR1; the primary next-hop for ABR1 is P and
the loop-free node-protecting alternate is A1.
The shortest path to an inter-region route may be learned from
multiple border routers with at least 2 different primary neighbors,
as is illustrated in Figure 5.  D is reached via ABR1 and ABR2 with
equal cost from S.  The primary neighbor to reach ABR1 is P1 and the
alternate is A1.  The primary neighbor to reach ABR2 is P2 and the
alternate is A2.  In this case, there are equal-cost primary next-
hops to reach D and they can protect each other.  In this example,
the primary next-hops would be to P1 and P2; if the link to P2
failed, then P1 could be used as an alternate and vice-versa.  Thus
the alternates can be obtained from the primary next-hops.
......             ......
...                         ...
..                               ..
..   10  +-----+    5    +-----+  5  ..
.  +------| A1  +---------| R1  |-----+ .
..   |      +-----+         +-----+     | .
.    |                                +-----+  10
.     |                 +--------------| ABR1|---------+
.     |                 |      5       +-----+         |
.  +-----+     5     +---+-+                .           |
.  |  S  |-----------|  P  |------------+   .         +-----+
. +-----+           +-----+   10       |   .         |  D  |
.     |                                |   .         +-----+
.    |                                |  .             |
..   |     +-----+                  +-----+  20        |
.  +-----| A2  |------------------| ABR2|------------+
.   10  +-----+    5             +-----+
...                               ...
Figure 4: Inter-Region Destination via One Border Router
......          ......
...                      ...
..                            ..
..   10  +-----+    5    +-----+  ..
.  +------| A1  +---------| R1  |-----+
..   |      +-----+         +-----+     |.
.    |             +-----+            +-----+  10
.     | +-----------| P1  |------------| ABR1|---------+
.     | |       5   +-----+    5       +-----+         |
.  +-----+                                   .          |
.  |  S  |---+  5    +-----+   10            .        +-----+
. +-----+   +-------| P2  |------------+   .         |  D  |
.     |             +-----+            |   .         +-----+
...                            ...
Figure 5: Inter-Region Destination via
Multiple Border Routers and Multiple Primary Neighbors
In the third case, the shortest path to an inter-region route
may be learned from multiple border routers but with a single
primary neighbor.  This is shown in Figure 6, where D can be
equally reached from S via ABR1 and ABR2.  The alternate next-
hop to reach ABR1 is A1 while the alternate to reach ABR2 is A2.
It is necessary to select one of the alternates to be inherited.
..    5  +-----+   15    +-----+ 20  ..
.     |                 |      15      +-----+         |
. +-----+           +-----+    5       |   .         |  D  |
.   10  +-----+   15             +-----+
Multiple Border Routers but One Primary Neighbor
6.1.1 Inheriting Alternate Next-Hops with One Primary Neighbor
The main question when deciding whether an alternate can be inherited
is whether or not that alternate will continue to provide the
necessary protection.  I.e., will the alternate continue to be usable
as an alternate and provide the same link or node protection with
respect to the destination that was provided with respect to the
border router.  The relationships shown in Figure 6 will be used for
illustrative purposes, although the topology connecting them may be
more general than that shown.  The proofs and explanations are
provided in Appendix A, but the answer is that the alternate will be
usable as an alternate and provide at least the same link or node
protection that was provided with respect to the border router.  The
alternate next-hop inheritance procedure SHOULD select a loop-free
node-protecting alternate, if one is available.
6.1.2 OSPF Inter-Area Routes
In OSPF, each area's links are summarized into a summary LSA, which
is announced into an area by an Area Border Router.  ABRs announce
summary LSAs into the backbone area and inject summary LSAs of the
backbone area into other non-backbone areas.  A route can be learned
via summary LSA from one or more ABRs; such a route will be referred
to as a summary route.
The alternate next-hop inheritance for summary routes is as described
in Section 6.1.1
6.1.3 OSPF External Routing
Rules of inheritance of alternate next-hops for external routes is
the same as for inter-area destinations.  The additional complication
comes from forwarding addresses, where an ASBR uses a forwarding
address to indicate to all routers in the Autonomous System to use
the specified address instead of going through the ASBR.  When a
forwarding address has been indicated, all routers in the topology
calculate the shortest path to the link specified in the external
LSA.  In this case, the alternate next-hop of the forwarding link
should be used, in conjunction with the primary next-hop of the
forwarding link, instead of those associated with the ASBR.
6.1.4 ISIS Multi-Level Routing
ISIS maintains separate databases for each level with which it is
dealing.  Nodes in one level do not have any information about state
of nodes and edges of the other level. ISIS level boundary points ,
also known as ISIS level boundary routers, are attached to both
levels.  ISIS level boundary routers summarize the destinations in
each, level. ISIS inter-level route computation is very similar to
OSPF inter area routing.  Rules for alternate next-hop inheritance is
the same as described in Section 6.1.1
6.2 OSPF Virtual Links
OSPF virtual links are used to connect two disjoint backbone areas
using a transit area.  A virtual link is configured at the border
routers of the disjoint area.  There are two scenarios, depending
upon the position of the root, router S.
If router S is itself an ABR or one of the endpoints of the disjoint
area, then router S must resolve its paths to the destination on the
other side of the disjoint area by using the summary links in the
transit area and using the closest ABR summarizing them into the
transit area.  This means that the data path may diverge from the
virtual neighbor's control path.  An ABR's primary and alternate
next-hops are calculated by RAPID on the transit area.
The primary next-hops to use are determined based upon the closest
set of equidistant ABRs; the same rules described in Section 6.1.1
for inter-area destinations must be followed for OSPF virtual links
to determine the alternate next-hop.  The same ECMP cases apply.
If router S is not an ABR, then all the destinations on the other
side of the disjoint area will inherit the virtual link's endpoint,
the transit ABR.  The same OSPF inter-area rules described in Section
6.1.1 must be followed here as well.
A virtual link cannot be used as an alternate next-hop.
6.3 BGP Next-Hop Synchronization
Typically BGP prefixes are advertised with AS exit routers router-id,
and AS exit routers are reached by means of IGP routes. BGP resolves
its advertised next-hop to the immediate next-hop by potential
recursive lookups in the routing database.  IP/LDP Local Protection
computes the alternate next-hops to the all the IGP destinations,
which includes alternate next-hops to the AS exit router's router-id.
BGP simply inherits the alternate next-hop from IGP.  The BGP
decision process is unaltered; BGP continue to use the IGP optimal
distance to find the nearest exit router.  MBGP routes do not need to
copy the alternate next hops.
6.4 Multicast Considerations
IP/LDP Local Protection does not apply to multicast traffic.  The
alternate next-hops SHOULD not used for multi-cast RPF checks.
This document does not introduce any new security issues. The
mechanisms described in this document depend upon the network
topology distributed via an IGP, such as OSPF or ISIS.  It is
dependent upon the security associated with those protocols.
8.  Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.
Internet organizations, except as needed for the  purpose of
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
[FRAMEWORK] M. Shand, "IP Fast Reroute Framework", draft-ietf-rtgwg-
ipfrr-framework-01.txt, June 2004
[LDP] L. Anderson, P. Doolan, N. Feldman, A. Fredette, B. Thomas,
"LDP Specification", RFC 3036, January 2001
[RSVP-TE] D. Awduche, L. Berger, D. Gan, T. Li, V Srinivasan, G.
Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels", RFC 3209,
[RSVP-TE FRR] P. Pan, D. Gan, G. Swallow, JP Vasseur, D. Cooper, A.
Atlas, and M. Jork, "Fast Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP
Tunnels", work-in-progress draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-lsp-fastreroute-
06.txt, June 2004
[RFC3137]  Retana, A., Nguyen, L., White, R., Zinin, A., and
McPherson, D., "OSPF Stub Router Advertisement", RFC 3137, June 2001
[RFC3277] D. McPherson, "Intermediate System to Intermediate System
(IS-IS) Transient Blackhole Avoidance", RFC 3277, April 2002
[ISIS] R. Callon, "Use of OSI IS-IS for Routing in TCP/IP and Dual
Environments", RFC 1195, December 1990
[RFC2966] T. Li, T. Przygienda, H. Smit, "Domain-wide Prefix
Distribution with Two-Level IS-IS", RFC 2966, October 2000
[OSPF] J. Moy, "OSPF Version 2", RFC 2328, April 1998
[RFC2370] R. Coltun, "The OSPF Opaque LSA Option", RFC 2370, July
10. Authors Information
Raveendra Torvi
Avici Systems
101 Billerica Avenue
N. Billerica, MA 01862
email: rtorvi@avici.com
Gagan Choudhury
Room D5-3C21
200 Laurel Avenue
email: gchoudhury@att.com
1880 Campus Commons Drive
email: cmartin@verizon.com
Brent Imhoff
WilTel Communications
3180 Rider Trail South
email: brent.imhoff@wcg.com
Don Fedyk
Nortel Networks
600 Technology Park
Billerica, MA 01821
email: dwfedyk@nortelnetworks.com
11. Editor's Information
Alia Atlas
email: aatlas@avici.com
Appendix A: Loop-Free Alternate Proofs
Consider where A2 is a loop-free alternate with respect to S and ABR2.  Will A2
be a loop-free alternate with respect to S and D?  Let there be three ABRs which
must be considered.  Each ABR can represent a group of ABRs with the same
.    |                                |  .             | |
..   |     +-----+                  +-----+  20        | |
.  +-----| A2  |------------------| ABR2|------------+ |
.   10  +-----+    15            +-----+              |
...       |                       ...                |
...    +---------------+    ...                   |
......    10     +--+--+.          20          |
...........| ABRt|-----------------------+
ABR1 is from the set of ABRs where D_opt(A2, ABR1) = D_opt(A2,
S) + D_opt(S, ABR1). In other words, A2 is not loop-free with
regards to S and ABR1.  Additionally, D_opt(S, D) = D_opt(S,
ABR1) + D_opt(ABR1, D) so ABR1 is on a shortest path from S to
ABR2 is from the set of ABRs where D_opt(A2, ABR2) < D_opt(A2,
S) + D_opt(S, ABR2). In other words, A2 is loop-free with
ABRt is from a set of ABRs where D_opt(S, D) < D_opt(S, ABRt) +
D_opt(ABRt, D).  In other words, ABRt is not on a shortest path
from S to D.
First, we will prove that D_opt(A2, D) < D_opt(A2, ABR1) +
D_opt(ABR1, D).  In other words, the shortest path from A2 to D
does not go through ABR1.
The shortest path from A2 to D via ABR1 also goes via S. A
shortest path from S to D goes via ABR1.
Step i: D_opt(A2, ABR1) + D_opt(ABR1, D) =
D_opt(A2, S) + D_opt(S, ABR1) + D_opt(ABR1, D)
The shortest path from A2 to D via ABR2 does not go through S.
ABR2 is on a shortest path from S to D.
Step ii: D_opt(A2, ABR2) + D_opt(ABR2, D) <
From previous and given that ABR1 and ABR2 provide equal-cost
paths from S to D:
Step iii: D_opt(A2, ABR2) + D_opt(ABR2, D) <
From previous and Step i:
Step iv: D_opt(A2, ABR2) + D_opt(ABR2, D) <
D_opt(A2, ABR1) + D_opt(ABR1, D)
Step v: D_opt(A2, D) <= D_opt(A2, ABR2) + D_opt(ABR2, D) <
Thus, the optimal path from A2 to D cannot go through ABR1.
Next, we will prove that if D_opt(A2, D) = D_opt(A2, ABRt) +
D_opt(ABRt, D), then A2 is still loop-free with respect to S and D.
In other words, even if A2's shortest path to D goes through an ABRt
which isn't on a shortest path from S to D, the path from A2 to D is
still loop-free with respect to S and D.  This is proved via
contradiction.
Assume that D_opt(A2, D) goes through ABRt.
Step i: D_opt(A2, ABRt) + D_opt(ABRt, D) <=
Because A2 is loop-free with respect to S and ABR2
Because ABR2 is on a shortest path from S to D and ABRt is not
Step iii: D_opt(S, ABR2) + D_opt(ABR2,D) <
D_opt(S, ABRt) + D_opt(ABRt, D)
From previous by adding Dopt(A2, S) to both sides
Step iv: D_opt(A2, S) + D_opt(S, ABR2) + D_opt(ABR2,D) <
D_opt(A2, S) + D_opt(S, ABRt) + D_opt(ABRt, D)
From Steps i and ii:
Step v: D_opt(A2, ABRt) + D_opt(ABRt, D) <
From Steps iv and v:
Step vi: D_opt(A2, ABRt) + D_opt(ABRt, D) <
Therefore, if D_opt(A2, D) is via ABRt, it does not go through
These two proofs show that if A2 is loop-free with respect to S and
ABR2, then A2 is loop-free with respect to S and D.
Appendix A.1 Loop-Free Node-Protecting Alternate Proofs
It must also be shown that if A2 is loop-free and node-protecting
with respect to S and ABR2, then A2 will still be node-protecting
with respect to S and D.  In other words, that A2 will be loop-free
with respect to P and D.
This is shown where D_opt(S, D) = D_opt(S, P) + D_opt(P, D), so that
D_opt(P, ABR1) + D_opt(ABR1, D) = D_opt(P, ABR2) + D_opt(ABR2, D).
First, it has already been proven that an ABR offering equal-cost
from S to D which is also loop-free with respect to S and D will be
selected by A2 over an ABR offering equal-cost from S to D which is
not loop-free with respect to S and D.  Since the alternate
inheritance is of interest only where all the ABRs offering equal-
cost paths to D have the same primary next-hop P, if A2 is loop-free
and node-protecting for one ABR offering equal-cost paths to D, then
A2 is node-protecting for all those ABRs.
Next, given that A2's optimal path to ABR2 does not go through P, is
to prove that if A2's optimal path to D goes via some ABRt, that that
path does not go through P.  This can be shown using variable
replacement of the second proof given as follows:
D_opt(A2, P) + D_opt(P, ABR2) + D_opt(ABR2, D)
Step iii: D_opt(P, ABR2) + D_opt(ABR2,D) <
D_opt(P, ABRt) + D_opt(ABRt, D)
From previous by adding Dopt(A2, P) to both sides
Step iv: D_opt(A2, P) + D_opt(P, ABR2) + D_opt(ABR2,D) <
D_opt(A2, P) + D_opt(P, ABRt) + D_opt(ABRt, D)
Therefore, if Dopt(A2, D) is via ABRt, it does not go through P.
This proves that if A2 provides a loop-free node-protecting alternate
for S to reach ABR2, then A2 will also provide a loop-free node-
protecting alternate for S to reach D.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
A Liberal Economist Remembers Tom Landry (...Again.)
In the run-up to last week's Superbowl my Facebook feed was just like yours: Positively vibrating with un-contained buzz for a sporting event about which I neither could, nor plan to, care any less. I haven't been interested in the Superbowl for years, except perhaps as a source of lament for the ever lower stoops it represents at the riverside of American popular culture. Last year at the same time I had to be told by one of my students who was playing.
As an unashamed progressive, aspiring artisan, *and* professional economics teacher, the two-week hypestorm of the Superbowl can be a gauntlet of spirit-crushing alienation—the yours-truly equivalent of all the scary desolation that befalls other single people around Christmas. To stave the blues I even make an annual ritual of tossing-off the same joke to my college classes, in which I lament that the conference alignments have permanently prevented Detroit from ever facing New Orleans in the ultimate contest. …And every year I have to explain all over again why there should be any irony whatsoever in the mental image of a nationally enthralled audience, rapt before the telecast of a contest between "Saints" and "Lions." Pretty generally the kids still don't get it. Point being, I may actually be the only person among my first, second, or even third circles of real-life friends who is officially all out of fucks to give about the Superbowl and its smorgasbord of unsavory capitulation to the engines of kleptocracy.
Not that there's been much of anywhere to hide: For fourteen straight days in January my Facebook feed was a veritable who's who of people I'm supposed to look up to, preening in anticipation of an evening of diabetic sloth and Orwellian prostration in patronage of two corporate monoliths trying to ruin each others' employees' lives with leg sweeps and armored headgear. Somehow it felt even worse this year, though this of course could be more about me, than it. But mixed in with the usual dreck about which team was better positioned for the game, which commercials were going to be the best and worst, and how the halftime show was expected to come off (remind me again who Katy Perry is?), there were some noteworthy flourishes of genuine interest--and two of these items ultimately came together in my consciousness in such a way as to merit a sugar-free thought or two of my own.
The first was a quiz making its way around Facebook about which NFL team a person should support. Perhaps you've seen it: After the usual handful of benign questions and a few seconds of thoughtful machination, the website hosting the quiz purports to tell you which NFL franchise is best suited to your personality and temperament. With many better things to do, I took the quiz and was told I would make a very good Patriots fan. Go figure.
My immediate reaction to the thing when it popped up in my feed was to comment on precisely this flaw: Sports affiliations in general, and NFL allegiances in particular, are highly durable to one's otherwise evolving tastes and values. To tell someone he ought to be a Patriots fan after an eight-question quiz is less like telling him he should try Pepsi and more like telling him he'd be happier as a Rosicrucian. Cute, maybe, but it ain't gonna happen. Like our political values, we form our NFL connections early and with a great deal of nostalgia-tinged influence from our local environments, typically while we are still children. And because the choice of team we support has no real consequence for us or anyone else, it is in consequence all but indestructible once it sets: a slab-on-grade foundation, if not of who we are then of who we were when we came into it. Impervious to changes of geography, parental influences, broadcast rights or lists of fellow supporters, however unpalatable the company. Our sports allegiances in this world are as inviolate as our lifelong distaste for the man down the street who threw rocks at us for cutting across his lawn on our bicycles.
Now hold that thought while I explain that the other blip above the din of Seattle-Boston hate week was a reprint of Sarah Vowell's improbably touching memorial to Tom Landry, who passed away in February of 2000.
You probably know that Landry was for over a generation the steely-eyed, granite-impassive head coach of the Dallas Cowboys. What you may not know is that he was what we would now call a Christian-Conservative Republican, or that, at the time, so was I. For Ms Vowell to have eulogized him in such a touching way was at once both the perfect complement to my early reactions about the quiz, and a bittersweet moment of regret for an earlier time in all our lives, regardless of one's favorite team.
For me the default NFL-football allegiance was, has always been, and more-or-less remains, with the Dallas Cowboys. I'm not a million miles from ashamed to admit that lately but it's still true. And it is precisely that combination of the youthful certitude with which I imbued my initial choice, and the changes that have happened since—to me, to the Dallas Cowboys, to the country we both used to love—which have made Ms Vowell's remembrance of the passing of their former head coach Tom Landry so difficult for me. Not for what it says about him, or me, or even her, but for what it says about us.
In January of 1978 I had just turned eight years old and my mother and I were living in a dreary apartment in Wappingers Falls, New York. I remember the big day as just the sort of cold and rainy winter Sunday that often besets the Mid-Hudson Valley for weeks and sometimes months on end. All afternoon a blustery drizzle had fallen over the vanishing snow drifts outside our window and speckled them in a pepper-crust of dirt. With all my friends inside for the evening and no appetite for a solo assault on the weather, I decided more or less by default to join Mom on the couch for this thing they called the Superbowl. I had never seen an NFL football game before. And I was hooked. Permanently, or so I thought at the time. Indeed hooked before I had any real notion of what was going on. To say I was changed by the moment is the sort of understatement people usually reserve for car crashes.
The precedent for such naïve zealotry had come three and a half years before, with my bitter disappointment over President Nixon's resignation, and later with the eventual outcome of 1976 Presidential election. At age four I had known very few things, but I knew I was a Republican. I knew in the very broadest terms what this meant but the connections to my own daily life and potential livelihood were as distant as the nearest quasar and there was precious little appetite among the available adult influences to try to set me straight.
The idea that I could have been a Republican was just fine with my Democratic-leaning Mother, who thought it was cute that her precocious and ever-nattering young son should bother to have a political identity of any kind. She'd been aggressively over-handled as a young child herself and come whatever consequences she was damned and determined that the legacy of her constriction would be a fierce independence in her progeny. (She succeeded.)
Meanwhile my by-then-estranged father was far too busy ignoring me for our seven yearly ski trips at the far end of the Taconic State Parkway, to notice. Had he received the news of my politics he would have validated them--but this would have called for a level of interest sufficient to register me as anything beyond a consumer of lift-tickets, and this requirement placed such potential simpatico firmly beyond our collective reach. Which is another thing that never really changed—if also a topic for another column. Point being, I was as staunch a Republican as a person can possibly be at an age when he can't be relied upon to pedal a bicycle without supervision.
There wasn't really much of a choice about this, either. In the mid-1970s nobody reeled from the abrupt disappearance of Richard Nixon as I did. His presence on the television had peppered my earliest childhood with just the sort of butch-gravel voice and haughty command most young boys can easily find at the other end of their family's living room. To me he was the ultimate man's man: Listening to him speak was an exercise in the receiving of dulcet toddies—as if Santa Claus had been cast in the role of a 747 pilot, narrating the surely-smooth landing to us over a crackly P/A. Walter Cronkite had painted a terrifying world against the eyeballs of a four year-old watching the evening news unsupervised in 1974, and the main force in my life that had made it less so, was Richard Nixon. How bad could things possibly be, when I could count on the thick tongue and stern visage of the CIC as he spelled out to me why it was so important to continue bombing Cambodia? To me Nixon hadn't been a Republican, or even a politician of any kind. He'd been, simply, The President. The only one we'd ever had in my lifetime and, presumably, the only one we ever would have, either. And then he'd resigned. And I—knowing positively nothing of which I spoke—had blamed the Democrats in Congress.
The grown-up realization that I wasn't alone in this misapprehension lessens the shame of its remembrance, if only a little. After all, by this time a series of full body blows had landed on both me and my country with an almost eerie verisimilitude: On the very day that the North Vietnamese captured the Saigon Independence Palace, indeed at the very moment that Sandy Gall was narrating the tank breakthrough at the iron fence, it was explained to me what a marital separation meant, and that soon I would have to move and change schools and learn how to live with one parent at a time. Surely all of this had to be someone's fault, and the obvious choice was the political movement that had reduced our trusty and benevolent jumbo jet-pilot to a whimpering wreck on national TV the previous summer. In my teens and twenties I would write three separate term-research papers about Watergate—one each in high school, college, and graduate school—and to re-read them now is to witness a fractious and painful transformation from the certitude of Executive Privilege to the necessity of the Rule of Law.
I remember very little about Nixon's successor other than the tears I cried when he, too, was taken from us—albeit via more conventional means. In the summer of what should have been our national zenith of jingoistic masturbation over the bicentennial, an unknown and almost preternaturally inexperienced smarty-farty had galvanized the cynical Washington press corps around a message of sweeping change, and bullied his way to the Democratic nomination by making shrewd use of the caucuses to compensate for less stellar results in the primaries. Tenaciously opposed in Congress and lacking even the most basic agenda for his tenure, he had quickly retreated into rudderless platitudes, unforced gaffes and mealy mouthed equivocation. (Stop me when any of this starts to sound familiar.)
True, no one yet knew what an Ayatollah was, but still I may have been the only seven year-old ever to be threatened with removal from a U.S. classroom over the hand-back of the Panama Canal. It was only the new President's first summer at the head of our affairs, but clearly this guy and his ilk had to go. Later that same season I'd started looking into the matter in earnest, and by late autumn I knew the country's future could stand no better chance than with the tall and straight-talking career administrator and former chair of the RNC, one George Herbert Walker Bush, whom I supported steadfastly in favor of his Hollywood-flack opponent for the Republican nomination (a man whose name escapes me just at the moment). Eventually I would cry on the third night of the 1980 Republican convention, too—if not over the eventual outcome until much, much later.
All of which brings us back to the moment I sat down on that couch in Wappingers Falls to view the spectacle of two NFL franchises slamming away at each other for the most coveted of prizes: SuperBowl XII, in January of 1978, Dallas vs. Denver. I had at this point already chosen George H W Bush for 1980, and I had never seen football before. I didn't even know the rules. If this much doesn't tell a person everything he needs to know about my childhood, nothing will.
On game-night itself it was the pageantry struck me first. The New Orleans Superdome was in its gawky infancy and it's hard to remember what a glittering spectacle of cocky commercial gravitas it was, given what has happened there since. When the two teams were introduced they took the field between flanking plumes of color-coordinated smoke and confetti which erupted from canisters that looked like nothing so much as mortar tubes. The National Anthem was sung by Phyllis Kelly and even before she started there were American flags everywhere. Everywhere. The halftime show was called "From Paris to Paris, Texas" and was performed by the Apache Belles—a majorette corps from the two-year college in Tyler, Texas. The play-by-play commentators were Pat Summerall and Tom Brookshire. A thirty-second commercial spot on the CBS telecast cost $162,000. The Cowboys were favored by six.
Now, if you're eight and you've never seen a football game before, and you're me, the first thing you have to do—even before you work out what a quarterback is or how to keep the score—is decide which team will be yours. And you have to do so with the death-grip passion of a summons to jihad. Good news, that, because for an eight year-old me still smarting over Watergate and the apparent theft of our '76 freedom-fest by a spineless peanut farming wimp, this was the easiest decision I'd encountered. Possibly ever.
Nobody had to tell me that the Cowboys were "America's Team," or that their hometown would soon rise to prominence as the Martha's Vineyard of the Republican Party. No one had to tell me that Dallas had a higher payroll or even that they were favored. All of this was at once inescapable and irrelevant: Dallas would win because they walked like they deserved it. They would hold the field because they took it expecting to. They would prevail because right-minded decent folk who polish their act and cross their T's and don't try to squeeze by on corner-cutting guile, were the ones who were always rewarded in our society and always deserved to be. The Cowboy team was more poised, more fit, way better looking, and far more polished in their execution.
And so it came to be, at least then and there. The 27-10 final score was if anything under-representative of Big D's total dominance. The factious and nerve-crippled Broncos would eventually commit eight (!!!) turnovers, and even a doe-eyed little kid who didn't quite know what was happening could have essentially called it from the opening kickoff, and felt good about it. After all, what could have been more just? If you trusted in the basic elegance of markets and the fundamental correctness of their outcomes, you knew to pick the Cowboys in Superbowl XII before Randy White had barreled through the line to force the first bad snap. People won because they did their homework and had their shit together. Might didn't make right; it flowed from it.
This is what being a Republican used to be about.
This is why, when those of us of a certain age think of Tom Landry, we can't help transport ourselves back to a time—yes, I'll say a more innocent time—when the Jack Kemp's and Tom Kean's and Bob Dole's of the world could smile a hale greeting for you and shake your hand until it hurt and look you straight in the eye and tell you they saw things differently. And if you disagreed you didn't hate them for it because they'd given you no reason to. They knew in their hearts they were right, just as you knew in your heart that they were not, and neither of you was pandering for the TV-soundbite or the disingenuous red meat to fan his base. No one was winning after having cast the other guy as a cartoon character. You disagreed, but you did it in good faith. Both of you. A person could say this about Republicans once, an increasingly long time ago.
And of all the people you could say this about, you could perhaps say it first about Tom Landry: a Christian Conservative before it was fashionable to capitalize either of those two words, and a Republican the way most of us breathe oxygen, but never with the faintest hint of antagonism for those who would come at things from a different perspective. In sport, as in politics, there was always much to hate about the larger group, but personally I never heard anyone say they hated Tom Landry the man. They hated his team. They hated that he won. But these are not the same thing. No matter how you felt about his record or his politics, you didn't hate him personally. So, okay, never mind the current crop of politicians for a moment; can you say the same about any Republican-leaning athlete of the modern era? Can you say it about Curt Schilling? About Lynn Swann? About Tim Tebow? …Really?
This is what happens to us when we spend too much time on Facebook, of course: Eventually we find two little blips, backed more or less against each other in our feed, and the combination sparks some otherwise improbable thought which completely commandeers our day. In this much, at least, I am not alone. And so it is that the tragedy of loss I feel over Sarah Vowell's memorial isn't just a typically nostalgic reverie for the innocence of youth; it is a nostalgic reverie for the country we all used to share. I don't just mourn for the loss of Landry, or for the loss of the youth I enjoyed when he and I were in our primes; I mourn an entire era when the sharing of our national discourse meant good-faith disagreement and mutual commitment to proportionate governance. And I mourn it because it's just as gone as he is.
You of course know where the story goes from that rain-swept evening in 1978—not just for the Cowboys, and the nation, but for me as well—even if you don't know me personally. As the giddy Republican resurrection of 1980 petered out and a once promising vanguard of the moderate wing lost his bearings under the cult of his boss' outsized persona, a cabal of increasingly nervous Texas businessmen banded together in suburban Dallas to give rise first to Lee Atwater, and then to Jerry Jones, and eventually to a progressive liberalism in the bosom of your present author, in retaliation for the other two developments.
The sadness I feel, in other words, isn't for the realization that I have changed: It's for the realization that, really, I haven't; it's the country that's changed. The country, and the Republican Party, and the poisoned well of social discourse which they've wrought to consolidate their ugly grip on power. With the reprint of Landry's eulogy, I can again remember not just a legacy of championship-level excellence, not just a corresponding chapter from our own lost innocence, and not just one of those grainy historical contexts which always manages to seem greater in our memories than any of them ever really were. I can remember a time—not that long ago, really—when an NFL football coach could be an avowed Christian, an avowed Republican, and almost universally respected for the class, and dignity, and above-all the good faith with which he hurled himself at everything he did. I remember Tom Landry once again, fifteen years later, as the Republican You Could Disagree With, and Not Hate.
He'll be missed.
Dave O'Gorman
Posted by Dave O'Gorman at 11:55 AM
Labels: cinema democratica, cinemademocratica, Dallas Cowboys, Dave O'Gorman, David O'Gorman, Nixon, Republican, Tom Landry
Persist, Adapt, Repeat


text:
TOP-UP SHOP
Login with any of these accounts:
I accept Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Xcloudgame new game release date announced
Xcloudgame is preparing to launch its new game called Monsters and Mysteries. This Tuesday (02/06) information related to the opening of the server was posted on the game's official Facebook page. The post informs that the game is expected to be released later this week on June 4th.
The game is currently being evaluated by Google Play and the App Store to become available to the public that has been waiting for more than a month. However the launch of the game for the iOS system will take a little longer, as the Apple store has not yet accepted the apk.
To have more information about the new Xcloudgame game, follow us on social media:
Xcloudgame: https://www.facebook.com/xcloudgame/
Monstros e Mistérios: https://www.facebook.com/monstrosemisterios/
Term of Use |
Xcloudgame Privacy Policy |
Copy Infringement Notice |
CopyRight(c)2013-2016XCLOUDGAME CO.,LIMITED. ALL Rights Reserved


During my Textile design studies, I learn several techniques about fabric art & design. a few of those were Tie& Dye, Batik, screen printing, fabric painting, different types of embroidery, zarri work, needle hook work, weaving, applique, quilting etc.. Once I were having a project in which I was assigned to create something by using maximum techniques I have learnt. So there I work on this wall art piece.. Have a look..
In this wall hanging, I have used about 25 techniques of art & craft..including some different things from mix media as well.. It was a white canvas & I paint & paste lots of things over it..Have a look at its detail.
In this picture, I am sharing a view of rural area & a village scene. in right corner I am showing water with glass mosaic & the stones made by clay. then I paste orignal grass but spray painted with green.. the two ladies are holding mud water pots & wearing tie & dye+silk paint dress..the house is made with applique technique & there is a small well also visible..
The hut is made with quilting & the roof with jute..the plant in mud vase is ribbon work embroidered..
Here it is the tree & thick leaves are needle hook embroidery work..
Marbled Clay stones..I use black color which mixed with white n the look is grey now!
Hills with batik technique..and some original small stone pieces.
and this little house with applique technique. I made a mosque with ribbon weaving & the hills are done with batik work. I paste these things on the board & then I fill the area with some little stones along with hand drawing. just to fill the extra space on canvas. I use oil pastels, glass paint & fabric paint/led as well..
Hermoso trabajo amiga. Muy interesante el saber trabajar varias técnicas. Un trabajo muy bonito.
Thanks Sonia.. Wesy mujy to is me kafi mistakes lagti hyn.. Hehe..dont u feel some?
Wow amazing, 25 different techniques in one project. Great work, Khadija!
Thank you Ambreen, it was a college project..otherwise I was not going to try this difficult project..
You are doing a very nice job on this art.
That is wild and exotic – I love all the 3-D elements, like the pots and the marbled stones. What a crafty workout!
haha..agree with you dear Mich..I try my level best while making..
this is wonderful. xo P.S.>thank you for sharing at the hop.
WOW… very beautiful work.pure rural culture…very nice.
Trabalho bonito e muito difícil de ser feito.
Tantas técnicas de artesanato juntas.
Thanks sweet friend & Happy weekend to you too..
Thank You Robin. I will be visiting soon!
I love everything you make!!
Thanks, so sweet of you!
So many great techniques in one work of art!
Thanks a bunch my dear..I will definitely be sharing more.
Hi, great post. I found you through the blog hop. Please stop by and say hi when you get a chance. .Be sure and check out my new Blog Hop that started. It's Weekly Goals Link Up. It's a great way to stay on track. Have a great day. :) Now following you.
Thanks & sure, I will be visiting & linking there..
So creative! Very cool! Thanks so much for sharing at Wednesday's Adorned From Above Blog Hop.
Ah, yes, nothing like working with fabric–so many techniques possible and you've packed in a punch!
That is really neat! It's great that you were able to study all these awesome techniques and use them in your art. Love it!
Have a great week and thanks for linking to my Homemaking Weekend. The new link is posted if you'd like to join this week!
Thank you! Sure I will be joining..
THAT is super creative.. You are super duper talented.. wow!!
This is actually what i was searching for, Thank you.


A 1,600-hectare ranch along the Castle River, more than a century old, will be protected under a conservation agreement announced by the Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC) Friday.
The Riverside Ranch, which is located in the foothills of southwest Alberta between the towns of Lundbreck and Beaver Mines, has been in the Zoratti family for more than a century, the organization said.
The agreement will help with the conservation of water quality, flood mitigation and the maintenance of an important watershed, the organization said.
"This ranch in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains is located in the headwaters region for the South Saskatchewan River, and every project protected in this area positively impacts the future of fresh water in Alberta," said Bob Demulder, regional vice-president of the Nature Conservancy of Canada.
The ranch was established after Peter Zoratti immigrated to Canada from Coderno, Italy, and bought a property near Beaver Mines.
"It is the family's wishes to see the ranch conserved, not just to protect the natural landscape, but also to honour the dedication of generations past and to preserve their ranching heritage," the NCC said.
The Castle River provides habitat to species at risk including westslope cutthroat trout and bull trout, according to the NCC. The property is also home to grizzly bears, cougars, wolves, elk and deer. Forests on the property include some limber pine trees that are more than 500 years old.
The announcement was made a day in advance of World Wetlands Day.


Though we are conquered with the latest gadgets and fast evolving technology, it is still good to know that traditional ways of imparting knowledge to your child are still effective. There are several ways that parents should know to unlock the academic potential of their child without spending too much. Below are some of the basic steps to optimize the development of your child in order him to prepare for school.
1. Read to your child everyday and expose him to books. Reading a book together with your child not only helps practice reading comprehension, it also helps foster a bond between the parent and the child. It is recommended that you set aside at least 20 minutes a day reading to your child. There are benefits that your child can get from reading: It promotes longer attention span. Develops listening skills. Stimulate the imagination. Build vocabulary. Develops a love for books as well as love for reading.
2. Talk with your child as much as you can. Talking to your child not only develops open communication between you and your child, but it also help him express his feelings and interests and boost intelligence.
3. Increase his playtime. Play reinforces the bonding and interaction between parents and child. It develops his imagination, explore his capabilities, encourages socialization and become independent.


text:
Foreign women bringing heart to Seoul
Over large cups of cappuccino in a sun-drenched room at the Seoul Club, three women on the welfare committee of the Seoul International Women's Association met recently to talk about their visit to a shelter for sexually abused children in the capital, which occurred the day before.
The memory of the visit disturbs Mary Morrison, Hahm Wha-sook and Choi Kyoung-ja . "Families try to cover up sexual abuse," says Ms. Choi, a member of the SIWA welfare committee and former first vice president of the Canadian Women's Club. "They tell these girls to shut up and be quiet. Where can she go? What about her life?" she asks, her eyes widening.
The shelter has offices on the first floor of a nondescript three-story building, with therapy rooms on the upper floors to protect the privacy of the children, who are removed from their families for their protection. Since 1999, SIWA has donated more than 20 million won ($17,500) to the shelter for counseling and education, and its members were following up with their recent visit.
"The counselors are teaching the children to live normal lives without shame and to work with them to recognize that what happened was not their fault," said Ms. Morrison.
SIWA has a history of service since the association's inception in 1956. The objective then, according to Ms. Morrison, was "to provide an opportunity for the foreign women in the community to get to know one another better and to get social contacts at regular intervals. But it was also to provide opportunities for interested members to participate in social service work."
Since the end of the Korean War, when communities of expatriates began making Korea their home, many of the social clubs organized by foreigners have been volunteering their time and money to help Korea's less fortunate.
SIWA is one of the oldest and largest of these clubs in Korea, with more than 600 members.
Last November, the group hosted its annual "SIWA Bazaar and the Diplomatic Community," in which almost all of the international women's associations in Korea participated.
All the embassies and a few not-for-profit organizations were invited to sell products from their country. Proceeds went to charities. At the end of the event, SIWA had raised 240 million won to donate to 50 nonprofit organizations all over Korea.
The one-day event usually takes six months of planning. But throughout the year, the group handles requests from several dozen organizations.
The woman currently heading the welfare committee is Ms. Morrison. When she left the United States to follow her husband, whose job took him to Korea, she thought she was leaving behind a 25-year career of social work.
After joining Seoul International Women's Association, she found herself conversing with Evelyne Fallows, president of the association last year. "The welfare committee chair is one of the most important jobs in SIWA," she told her, "and you're the perfect person for it."
With Ms. Morrison's background in social work and the efforts of women with diverse backgrounds and nationalities, the welfare committee at SIWA is thriving.
SIWA has long-term associates, but when an association becomes self-sufficient, the women's group begins focusing on another group to help.
Often, it will watch where government aid goes before deciding which cause to support. For example, the government had begun sponsoring children's services, so the committee thought that a need would develop elsewhere.
Research revealed that abandoned elderly were unable to receive government support. The government has programs to aid the elderly who don't have children, but if their children are alive, senior citizens aren't eligible for government aid even if their children can't, or won't, support them.
"There are so many, and they are so excluded from society," Ms. Hahm says. So SIWA started a Golden Age program, through which it financially supports about 50 elderly people so that they can go to the doctor and buy food.
SIWA has also donated money to disadvantaged students after the crisis of the International Monetary Fund, to orphanages and facilities for the mentally and physically handicapped, and to people devastated by Typhoon Rusa in 2002 and Typhoon Maemi in 2003.
The committee sees rising divorce rates signaling a splintering of the middle class and a deterioration of a traditionally strong family culture. "More children are going to need help since the economic slump," Ms. Hahm says.
SIWA is just one of the many expatriate clubs engaged in social work. Not too far away from the Seoul Club, on a different day, a dozen members of the American Women's Club are at the Millennium Seoul Hilton hotel for a monthly committee meeting.
Afterward, Kathy Scalabre, the president of the the American Women's Club, calls the group's charity work "one of the most amazing parts of AWC." One of the group's objectives is to "raise and distribute funds for general welfare purposes, for the local Korean and American communities."
In the past, the group has donated 3.5 million won to Sorok-do Volunteer Center, in South Jeolla province, to buy 10 wheelchairs for patients who suffer from leprosy, strokes and other degenerative diseases associated with aging.
It has also donated 5 million won to Guen Yuk Byung Jae Dan, a center for people with muscular dystrophy. It has given 2.2 million won to Buleumeujeunwha, a meals-on-wheels program, to order 40 20-kilogram bags of rice.
Last year, members "adopted" orphans and brought them a gift for the holidays. Members also help staff a secondhand store on the U.S. base in Yongsan, whose proceeds go to charities such as the Pearl Buck Foundation, Salvation Army and Ae Ran Won, a center for unwed mothers.
The members also organize Hello Korea, when volunteers teach English for a day in the countryside to underprivileged children. And they publish Arirang, a magazine dedicated to the arts, culture and travel. Again, proceeds go to charities.
Charity balls
In addition to all these events, the group holds a winter gala every year, its main fundraising event. It raises money for charity and it's a way for many expatriates to end the year in style before returning to their home country for the holiday season.
The event drew 430 guests and raised 48 million won last year. The theme last year was a masked ball set in Venice, organized by Suzanne Salg. The only reason Ms. Salg decided to put her energy into the ball was because 100 percent of the proceeds go to charities, she said.
Elegant affairs like these are popular among foreign charities. The Dutch Club Hendrik Hamel is holding a ball April 24 at the Grand Hyatt Hotel, which has already sold out. The group expects to raise 20 million won for charities yet to be named.
Also, the British Association of Seoul takes an active part in local charities with its annual Queen's Ball, which will be held at the Hyatt on June 5.
At a party last year, which had the theme of Neverland, the association raised 80 million won, most of it going to Open Door Welfare to help build a home in Yangpyeong for abused children. The association has also helped raise money for washing machines and a staircase for the charity.
"Abused kids point to problems in Korean society, so showing them to foreigners is embarrassing, in a way," says Hwang Chum-gon of Open Door Welfare. But his meetings with several members of the British Association made him realize that "these people don't see them as Korean kids, but a child in need."
For its 2004 fundraising events, the British Association has chosen three recipients: Open Door Welfare wants to create a therapy center in Yangpyong; Emmaus Center, in Gwangju, South Jeolla province, which is run by Father Noel O'Neill of Ireland, is planning to erect a new building for handicapped patients.
The Seton Sisters, a Catholic charity, have institutes all over Korea, but the two places the British Association is focusing on is the Margaret House, an after-school center for disadvantaged children, and Sunflower House, for teenage girls who have left their homes. The Sunflower House provides shelter and counseling for the girls to return to school or acquire vocational training so they can support themselves.
The welfare committee of the British Association of Seoul is run by Susie Reilly. "It's really a privilege to be welcomed in by these not-for-profit [organizations] and to be able to help," Reilly says. "There are two reasons to join welfare: give and take. You acclimate yourself to this society, and the events that raise money are fun."
The past president of the association, Lynette Loizou, decided to join in order to participate in a life outside of pure socializing. "We're giving something back to the Korea we live in and not just enjoying the best of society," she says.
The Seoul Japan Club also says its members organize drives for local causes and have donated money or gathered clothing for orphans and the elderly.
As a result of helping out, these organizations are also fostering good relations between Koreans and the expatriate community. Hwang Chum-gon, of Open Door Welfare, says, "The way I see it, these foreigners are in Korea for just a short time. And as much as they have received, they want to give back."
You Song-ja with Jeon Jin Sang, a Catholic organization that champions efforts to help youths and receives help from the Seoul International Women's Association, points to what she sees as a love of fellow humankind.
In helping others, many members of these organizations find that they are also on the receiving end.
"AWC was a lifesaver for me," says Ms. Salg of the American Women's Club. "I am humbled by the women I meet. These are strong, intelligent, caring women who volunteer their time. They could be playing tennis every day. They could be working out. They could be taking a flower decorating class.
"Not that there's anything wrong with those things, but they chose to volunteer their time to support this organization that fosters friendship, and gives to the community and to charity. ... We don't sit around and say, 'What can we do?' We say, 'Where do I start?'"
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS
Association de Francophones des Coree
julie_afc@yahoo.com
American Women's Club
awckorea@yahoo.com
British Association of Seoul
basseoul@yahoo.co.uk
Busan International Women's Association
www.biwa.co.kr
Dutch Club
hamelkorea@hotmail.com
Seoul International Women's Association
www.siwapage.com
Seoul Japan Club
www.sjc.ne.kr
Call your embassy for more information.
Koreans pitch in to build homes
It's not just expatriates who help the unfortunate. Habitat for Humanity Korea is gearing up for the 2004 season. The not-for-profit organization, which helps build homes for low-income families, is planning to build 68 homes this year at a total budget of 4.5 billion won.
About 6,000 volunteers will be needed to fulfill this year's goal. Although the group welcomes and is backed by many expatriates, Koreans make up the bulk of its volunteer workforce. Habitat for Humanity relies on fundraising and donations from construction companies for supplies, but it needs people to donate their labor.
Construction will begin in May with Saturday events. During this time, volunteers will lay the groundwork, such as framing, installing utilities and electricity. Efforts will kick into high gear during the Korea Blitz Build 2004, which will run Aug. 2 to 7, with about 2,000 volunteers expected that week.
The seven sites are Gangneung, Gangwon province; Gunsan, North Jeolla province; Daegu, North Gyeongsan province; Cheonan, Gyeonggi province; Jinju, South Gyeongsang province; Chuncheon, Gangwon province; and Taebaek, Gangwon province.
This year, Cheonan will again host the most number of homes. The homes were designed by Junglim Associates.
Fundraising events throughout the year include a fashion show on May 31 and talks are under way for a concert. Several years ago, Japanese and Korean students biked across Korea to increase awareness of Habitat for Humanity's work and to raise money.
Habitat for Humanity International began in 1976 in the United States when Millard and Linda Fuller gathered supporters to discuss the possibility of partnership housing, "where those in need of adequate shelter would work side by side with volunteers to build simple, decent houses," according to the Web site. Around the world, about one house goes up every 27 minutes.
Habitat for Humanity Korea began in 1992, but the foundation really began moving in 1994 with a project in Uijeongbu, north of Seoul, where three homes were built.
Since then, Habitat Korea has built more than 380 homes on the peninsula under the leadership of Chung Kun-mo, the first chairman of Habitat for Humanity Korea. The organization has also sent volunteers to other international sites.
One of the most celebrated Habitat events in Korea was when Mr. Fuller, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, his wife, Rosalyn, and former Philippines President Corazon Aquino visited a construction site. Then-Korean President Kim Dae-jung and his wife, Lee Hee-ho, also participated, along with other volunteers who built 136 homes.
For more information, go online at www.habitat.org or www.habitat.or.kr.
by Joe Yong-hee
Woowa Brothers forms robot development and manufacturing unit
Hyundai's Ioniq 6 receives EPA range of up to 361 miles, beats Tesla's Model 3
Boy band Stray Kids to headline Lollapalooza Paris festival
[Meanwhile] Winter Games on edge (KOR)
China's Covid test policy irks Koreans, seen as retaliation


My first year as a Scout was the 40th Anniversary of Camp and while the patch collecting bug took a few more years to kick in, it was not long after that I acquired this 40th Anniversary Jacket Patch.
What patch was issued for your first year attending summer camp?
My first year was 1987…not sure there's space to list them all!
Just found this site. I have a bunch of 1960's vintage TMR, OA, Kaufmann, Alpine, Pouch, and Schiff patches, World Jamboree patches (embroidered and leather), neckerchiefs, vintage slides, etc. that I would like to see go to a good home or homes. If you are interested, please contact me. FYI, back in the day, I was at Camp Hayden with Troop 56 from Forest Hills, NY. By the way, I have the 40th Anniversary patch listed above.


Yonten Gi Kawa depicts life in the rural area of Bhutan. Day by day, 11 year old Sherab Dorji walks three hours to school along with the other children in the village. They walk to school, singing together. The road leads across a mountain and through the woods. The parents constantly fear of their children meeting up with wild animals along the path. When Sherab walks the last part by himself in the evening, he prays aloud to fight his fear. They walk so much, his father says, that their socks tear within a week. Sherab's parents depends on subsistence farming. The mother and sister are seen out late in the night .
IndieKINO International Film Festival in Korea.


text:
Jim Ward (body piercer)
Jim Ward
June 28, 1941 (1941-06-28) (age 78)
Western Oklahoma, United States
body piercer
James Mark Ward (born June 28, 1941) is an American body piercer. In a 2004 documentary, entitled The Social History of Piercing, MTV called him "the granddaddy of the modern body piercing movement."[1]
1 Early years
2 Innovations
Early years[edit]
Ward was born in 1941 in Western Oklahoma and moved to Colorado when he was eleven.[2] In 1967, in New York he joined the New York Motorbike Club, a gay S&M group, and experimented with nipple piercing. During this time he also studied jewelry making. Ward then moved to Colorado, where he joined the gay Rocky Mountaineer Motorcycle Club and further experimented with piercing, genital in particular. In 1973, Ward moved to West Hollywood (a gay village of Los Angeles) where he met Doug Malloy. Together they developed the basic techniques and equipment that have become piercing industry standard.
Innovations[edit]
Ward pioneered many jewelry designs including the fixed bead ring and internally threaded barbells. He was introduced to barbell style jewelry by Horst Streckenbach ("Tattoo Samy"), a tattooist and piercer from Frankfurt, Germany, and his student Manfred "Tattoo" Kohrs from Hanover, Germany.
"The first barbells I recall came from Germany. Doug had made contact with Tattoo Samy, a tattooist and piercer from Frankfurt. Over the years Samy came to the States a number of times and frequently showed up in LA to visit Doug. On one of his first visits he showed us the barbell studs that he used in some piercings. They were internally threaded, a feature that made so much sense that I immediately set out to recreate them for my own customers."Jim Ward[3]
With funding from Malloy (derived from his work with the Muzak corporation), Ward began using his home as a private piercing studio in 1975. Dubbing his studio the Gauntlet, he drew an initial clientele from a mailing list provided by Doug and by running classified ads in local gay and fetish publications. After three years of continued refinement with techniques and equipment, Ward opened the Gauntlet as a commercial storefront operation in West Hollywood on 17 November 1978. The establishment of this business — considered the first of its type in the United States[4] — was the beginning of the body piercing industry.[4][5][6]
In 1977, with the assistance of Malloy and Fakir Musafar, Ward started the piercing magazine Piercing Fans International Quarterly (PFIQ).[7]
^ Chesler, Jessica (2003). The Social History of Piercing. MTV NEWS
^ Ward, Jim (2004-10-24). "Who Is Jim Ward?". Running the Gauntlet. BME. Archived from the original on 2012-07-09. Retrieved 2007-11-25.
^ Ward, Jim (23 January 2004). "In the beginning there was Gauntlet". Toronto: BMEZINE.COM. Archived from the original on 13 July 2012. Retrieved 2010-11-09.
^ a b Brandon Voss (2007-10-09). "Father Knows Best". The Advocate. Retrieved 2007-11-25.
^ "Running the Gauntlet" Archived 2012-07-09 at Archive.today, cited in "In the Flesh: Body Piercing as a Form of Commodity-Based Identity and Ritual Rite of Passage," honors thesis by Amelia Guimarin, under the direction of Prof. Teresa Caldiera, Anthropology, UC Irvine, 2005
^ Ferguson, Henry (January 2000). "Body piercing". Student BMJ. Retrieved 2007-11-25.
^ Ward, Jim (2004-10-24). "The World's First Piercing Magazine". Running the Gauntlet. BME. Archived from the original on 2012-07-09. Retrieved 2007-11-25.
Jim Ward at the BME Encyclopedia
Running the Gauntlet Jim Ward's column at BME
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jim_Ward_(body_piercer)&oldid=865357554"
LGBT artists from the United States
People from Oklahoma
LGBT people from Oklahoma
Webarchive template archiveis links


text:
Common Would Like to Experience Life as A Husband
WENN/Adriana M. Barraza
In a preview of his appearance on Facebook Watch's 'Red Table Talk', the 'Glory' hitmaker confesses to Jada Pinkett Smith about his readiness to settle down with the right partner.
AceShowbiz - Rapper/actor Common is keen to find himself a wife, following his high profile romances with R&B star Erykah Badu and tennis ace Serena Williams.
During an appearance on Jada Pinkett Smith's Facebook Watch show, "Red Table Talk", the "Glory" hitmaker revealed he's ready to settle down with the right partner.
In an exclusive clip for People.com, Jada refers to the music star's recently released book, "Let Love Have the Last Word: A Memoir", and says, "You said in the book also that you've accomplished everything but that you're not a husband."
Common, real name Lonnie Rashid Lynn, nods and replies, "Yeah... I would like to be a husband. Now I think I just want that partnership, to be able to experience life where I'm growing as a human being and it's fun too."
INXS Mourning Death of Their Manager
Rod Stewart Admits to Being 'a Bit Spiteful' Towards Elton John and Regrets It
Jamie Lynn Spears Kills Family Cats With Her Tesla, Blames It on Car Being 'So Quiet'
He then adds, "I know it's hard, also," as Jada - who is married to actor Will Smith - bursts into laughter.
His comments come after he revealed he sought counselling to deal with his relationship issues.
Common, who was most recently linked to political analyst Angela Rye, told People magazine in May, "Talking about my intimacy avoidance and love addiction was an 'aha' moment for me. The more you talk, the more you see the patterns you created for yourself.
"I'm open to a relationship now. I know how to communicate like an adult now. I want to be the best partner I can be."
Courtney Love and Dave Grohl Get Permission to Pursue Marc Jacobs Lawsuit
Daniel Craig Hits the Gym in Leg Cast as He Prepares to Return for 'Bond 25' Filming
Common Has Nothing Against Jaguar Wright Despite Being 'Hurt' by Her Sexual Assault Allegations
Common Admits to Squeezing in a Birthday Party Just Before COVID-19 Lockdown
Common Gushes Over 'Queen' Tiffany Haddish: 'I'm Happy'
Common Accused of Sexually Assaulting Singer Jaguar Wright While She's Asleep


text:
Q: Managing Multiple Versions of Code in Git I have a project that I am currently working on utilizing the GitFlow method. We recently have gotten a client where they will be using our code base with a few changes made specific to them.
What I am looking to do is have their code automatically updated with hotfixes and features implemented in our master branch, while still having their code separate and changes made not interfering with the master branch.
So basically hotfix -> merges to master/client branch
In addition if there was any way to treat the client code as a separate repo, so that a development branch could be setup with it that would be even better, but it needs to be able to receive the changes to the master branch as well.

A: Using a "fork" of your normal repository sounds like a great way to go, actually. This is the basis for how GitHub works.
On your central Git server:
mkdir clients_repo.git
cd clients_repo.git
git init --bare

Make the initial "fork" of your official repository, which will only bring over the "master" branch:
git clone git@server/official_repo.git
cd official_repo
git remote add clients_repo git@server/clients_repo.git
git push clients_repo master

You can make any number of branches in the clients_repo you want.
Work on the Client's Repository:
git clone git@server/clients_repo.git
cd clients_repo
git remote add upstream git@server/official_repo.git
git fetch upstream
# create branches, edit, commit, merge, whatever

When it comes time to integrate changes from your official repository into the client's, just merge upstream/master into your clients_repo master branch:
cd clients_repo
git checkout master
git fetch upstream
git merge upstream/master
# Resolve conflicts and commit if necessary
git push origin HEAD


Consult World Rugby Beginners guide to rugby for a good overview of the sport.
On offense, players can use lateral passes or forward kick to beat opponent's defense.
On defense, players try to stop their opponents by tackling them to the ground (avoiding contact to the head). Once the ball carrier is on the ground, he must release the ball to allow a standing player to recover it. The tackler must also let him go. This rule makes rugby very fast pace, with little interruptions.
Rugby teams are usually made up of players with specific roles, depending on their strengths and weaknesses, making the game both accessible and strategic.
Visit World Rugby website to find more about rugby rules.
Download World Rugby Laws of the Game.
Helmets conform to World Rugby regulations.
Shorts with padding sewn on the inside.


California City Correctional Facility is located in California City, and is the third largest landmass city in the state. To the east is the Sierra Nevada Range, where the Piute and Tehachapi Mountains meet in Kern County. Some of the landmarks in the area include Mammoth Lakes where you can ski the hills in the winter and hike the trails in the summer. To the northeast is Death Valley National Park, best known for its below-sea-level basin, extreme summer heat, ghost towns and colorful rocks. California City, a great place to live and explore!
CAC is a Level II, general population, facility consisting of three (3) facilities, encompassed within one air conditioned structure and includes one Administrative Segregation housing unit. CAC is owned by CoreCivic, leased, staffed and operated under the authority of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). CAC began receiving CDCR level II population in December of 2013.
George Jaime has been warden or acting warden at California City Correctional Facility since April 2018. Prior to this assignment, Mr. Jaime was the Chief Deputy Warden at Kern Valley State Prison in Delano, California, a position he held since June 2017.
Mr. Jaime has worked for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) for 24 years. In this timeframe, Mr. Jaime has worked the majority of his career between North Kern State Prison and Kern Valley State Prison, in a variety of positions. Mr. Jaime began his career in November 1993, for the Plant Operation Department. Over the years, Mr. Jaime promoted up through several departments and in May 2012, was promoted to an Associate Warden and later promoted to Chief Deputy Warden.
Penny Shank began her career with CDCR in 2000 and has been serving as the Chief Executive Officer at California City Correctional Facility since May 2017. Prior to that, Penny was the CEO at California State Prison–Los Angeles County for five years, where she also held positions as the Food Administrator I, Correctional Health Services Administrator II, and Chief Support Executive. Penny is also a Registered Dietitian. She holds a Bachelor's Degree from the Pennsylvania State University and a Master's Degree from Bowling Green State University.


Meaning of Thomasyoung, Anagram solver, Scrabble word finder Thomasyoung?
What is the meaning of Thomasyoung?
Scrabble word finder for oasTgoynmuh. Google scrabble cheat for Thomasyoung. is an anagram answer for Tugsmyohnao. Search engine Word puzzles for aToughynmso. Thomasyoung gauhsoTnmoy, gumsoonahyT. Meaning of Thomasyoung.
Tags: Anagram meaning of Thomasyoung. anagram solver, meaning of Thomasyoung. Found the meaning of Thomasyoung? This page defines Thomasyoung. AnagramScrabble.com anagrams from Thomasyoung.
Meaning of Dgngnk Meaning of Hyeqgu Meaning of Lguvaq Meaning of Pshiyx What is the meaning of Cvy? Meaning of Dlcoas What is the meaning of Lyfp? Meaning of Dmdhhk What is the meaning of Fjefb? Meaning of Ybemyt What is the meaning of Ukydrk? What is the meaning of Eutchu? What is the meaning of Weewhiu? What is the meaning of Aixyadra? What is the meaning of Zaydipsye?


text:
Okorocha Set To Approve 'Sleeping Allowance' For Imo Workers
GC Posted On: May 03, 2018
The governor of Imo State, Rochas Okorocha, has announced automatic promotion for all workers in the state civil service, with the exception of those who are newly employed.
He also promised that because of the fondness he had for the workers, he could also approve sleeping allowance for them.
Okorocha announced the automatic promotion in his address at the 2018 Workers' Day celebration, which held on Tuesday at Heroes Square in Owerri.
This is even as low turnout marred the celebration, as many workers stayed away from the event.
Addressing the workers, the governor said, "I have therefore approved an automatic promotion for all workers of Imo State.
"This automatic promotion means that if you are in Grade Level Eight, you are now in Grade Level Nine.
"This is because since I became governor seven years ago, you have not been promoted.
"Without you, the activities of government would be crippled. You are the engine room behind all our successes.
"I thank you for your patience. You are so dear to me. I can even approve sleeping allowance for you."
Okorocha said his administration would abide by whatever decision is reached between the Federal Government and the Nigerian Labour Congress concerning the new minimum wage for Nigerian workers.
The governor said that his administration had approved new salary structure for the workers, though he did not provide the details.
An address read by Paul Akalazu, state chairman, Trade Union Congress, on behalf of Organised Labour in the state, urged the state government to immediately commence payment of 100 percent salaries for all workers.
"We call on the governor to direct the immediate restoration of 100 percent salary payment to all categories of workers as an appreciation of the sacrifices made by the workers during the economic recession."
The organised labour urged the Okorocha led administration to clear all pension arrears and gratuities of the state's senior citizens.
'I Will...
Okorocha
'Sleeping
MY GOODNESS!! OAU Students Seen Sleeping On The Ground{See photos}
40-Year-Old Man Arrested After Secretly Sleeping With His Neighbours Two Daughters
Little Girl Unhurt After A Truck Ran Over Shop Where She Was Sleeping In Imo State
Man Arrested For Sleeping With Secondary School Students In Lagos
Adorable Photos Of Infant Twins Embracing While Sleeping Go Viral