Merit has setup the nanog-futures list and made it public and open from
the
outset.. that is the forum to take this discussion to but focus on
HAS set up? I thought they were going to set it up. Hmmm
Well, what do you know, here it is at the bottom of this page...
[for those not reading nanOg-reform, this is a
hidden reference to my yesterday's post]
Reading nanog-reform? Is there some kind of list? Let me have
a look at http://www.nanog-reform.org. Nope, nothing here but
old news.
http://www.nanog-reform.org/cgi-bin/twiki/view/NANOGReform/DraftBylaws
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 11:05:03AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Reading nanog-reform? Is there some kind of list? Let me have
a look at http://www.nanog-reform.org. Nope, nothing here but
old news.
The nanog-reform list was announced both on nanog@ and
during the Sunday night
Aha! So there really is more stuff hidden away on that
site for the chosen few. Perception is reality, eh?
People, please, gain some perspective here. Nobody wants the
thankless job of maintaining a mailing list that badly.
Perhps I'm being too subtle here. I fully realize that
all
Greetings!
We are considering Fortigate 300A to be deployed in our network.
I would like to hear your experience with this product, if you are
using/have used/tested Fortigate. (and also about their support service).
Pl. write off list and if there's an interest, I'll summarize to the list.
I
Most of the note below is just a rant, similar in form to the dozen notes
by a handful of posters over the weekend here, on NANOG-Reform
NANOG-Futures. C'mon folks, refocus that energy into doing something
professional and positive for the NANOG community.
Please cease demands for
Arhchive here michael:
http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog-futures/
not sure if its complete yet but i know merit are trying to include the first
few messages
nanog-reform here:
http://mailarchive.oct.nac.net/nanog-reform/maillist.html
again, dont know how complete it is. understand
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/computersecurity/infotheft/2005-02-21-choicepoint-expands-warning_x.htm
- ferg
At 1:05 AM -0700 1/31/05, Pete Kruckenberg wrote:
After another long week of dealing with upgrade now or die
vulnerabilities, I'm wondering...
Is there data or analysis that would help me quantify the risks of
waiting (while I plan and evaluate and test) vs. doing immediate
software upgrades?
With
My favorite quote(s) from this very brief article:
Right now, the most recognizable Internet governance
body is a California-based non-profit company, the
International Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
(ICANN).
But developing countries want an international body,
such as the U.N.'s
the report itself is linked to from
http://www.itu.int/wsis/wgig/index.html
Scott
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Feb 21 13:39:30 2005
X-Original-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
[ snip ]
As I was browsing the archive, I
noticed my post and his and another one from William Leizon
that quoted
mine have been removed from it.
From what I understand, the archive feature wasn't turned on until
just before the first post that was
I forgot to reference an (ironic) article that Reuters
posted back in July 2004 entitled U.N. Internet Policy
Off Course, Pioneer Says...
The only reference I can find of it at the moment
is:
http://www.undp.org.vn/mlist/ksdvn/072004/post42.htm
which is culled from the United Nations
My favorite quote is:
All countries want to counter spam -- unsolicited commercial messages that
can flood email accounts by the hundreds and burden the web with unwanted
traffic.
Especially in lite of the comment you posted and the fact that developing
countries seem to be the major sources of
-Original Message-
From: Bill Nash [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 9:53 PM
To: Hannigan, Martin
Cc: William Allen Simpson; nanog@merit.edu
Subject: RE: NANOG Changes
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
[ snip ]
As I was browsing the
All:
Reminder, if you sent an email regarding NANOG changes to either list
(NANOG or NANOG-Futures) between Thursday (Feb. 17) and Saturday (Feb. 20),
the list archive was not working yet. Sorry about the disruption and loss.
Please resend your email privately to [EMAIL PROTECTED] We will make
On 21 Feb 2005, at 10:06, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
nanog-reform here:
http://mailarchive.oct.nac.net/nanog-reform/maillist.html
again, dont know how complete it is. understand also, the list has
been open to
subscriptions, the reason for creating it was to allow a bunch of
people to kick
some
On Feb 21, 2005, at 1:55 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Especially in lite of the comment you posted and the fact that
developing
countries seem to be the major sources of SPAM these days.
a) spam, not SPAM (which is a tasty luncheon meat from Hormel)
b) s/sources/entry points/ The vast majority of
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 10:55:04 -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:
My favorite quote is:
All countries want to counter spam -- unsolicited commercial messages that
can flood email accounts by the hundreds and burden the web with unwanted
traffic.
I'm intrigued at the failure to distinguish between
On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 08:43:15AM +0900, Dave Crocker allegedly wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 10:55:04 -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:
? My favorite quote is:
? All countries want to counter spam -- unsolicited commercial
messages that ? can flood email accounts by the hundreds and burden
the web
Scott W Brim wrote:
On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 08:43:15AM +0900, Dave Crocker allegedly wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 10:55:04 -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:
? My favorite quote is:
? All countries want to counter spam -- unsolicited commercial
messages that ? can flood email accounts by the hundreds
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 19:45:12 -0500, Scott W Brim wrote:
I'm intrigued at the failure to distinguish between the web and
email, given that spam is a messaging phenomenon, not a publishing
phenomenon.
It's actually a failure to distinguish the web from the Internet
i was probably
Dave, as you're in Apricot anyway .. there's an APDIP session today
evening that's discussing these ITU/WGIG issues.
http://igov.apdip.net/events/apricot2005/document_view
UNDP-APDIP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005/APNIC 19 in partnership with Internet
Governance Task Force of Japan
Date: Tuesday 22nd
When I hear Robert Mugabe talk about internet governance I don't really
get the impression that he has the interests of the people of Zimbabwe at
heart.
joelja
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Dave Crocker wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 19:45:12 -0500, Scott W Brim wrote:
I'm intrigued at the failure to
Methinks they've already taken it...
- ferg
-- Joe Maimon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps its time to give them the web so that we can have the internet back?
--
Fergie, a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
Engineering Architecture for the Internet
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
25 matches
Mail list logo
