Years ago when meeting with the lawyers to talk about the need to block
access to a list of websites I was coming from the technical side and
talking about how all of our possible solutions were incomplete and easily
circumvented by our users. The lawyers' response was to explain the
concept of
On 8/16/2013 12:46 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Aug 16, 2013, at 00:37 , Sean Donelan s...@donelan.com wrote:
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013, Seth Mattinen wrote:
We'll also need this data in units of number of Libraries of Congress.
The researchers at the Library of Congress are more than happy to
On 8/14/2013 3:00 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
I should have remembered, NANOG prefers to correct things. So here are
several estimates about how much IP/Internet traffic is downloaded
I had always assumed that Bytes were like photons, and had no mass.
--
Dave
On 8/4/2013 10:41 AM, Chad Reid wrote:
Is anyone from Comcast on the list that can assist or know of a contact?
This message is private and confidential. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender and remove it from your system.
I may, but it appears that you don't want me
. I hope that doesn't make
it even harder for you to find answers to your questions from the
service provider, but I suspect that it will.
--
Dave Sparro
On 1/30/2013 5:03 PM, John Levine wrote:
The muni power companies around here provide service every bit as good
as NYSEG, the private power company, at literally half the price.
The muni providers have a bunch of cost advantages that help them keep
the price lower.
municipal utilities:
-
On 1/9/2013 10:06 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
Who uses it? Or did you see your IP listed in one of those multiple dnsbl
query sites and contacted them on general principles even though you didn't
see any actual bounced email that could be traced to a spam rats listing?
That said, it is
On 1/10/2013 9:53 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
Unused space generally gets a $generate type generic scripted runs
which could be whatever, like ip-ad-dr-ess.example.com
http://ip-ad-dr-ess.example.com
If the IP address hasn't been assigned to example.com, why would make a
DNS entry that
On 10/1/2010 5:22 AM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
really too much to ask? They could say, to everyone involved, and to
the community as a whole, ``This ain't right. *We* maintain the official
allocation records. In most cases, *we* made the allocations, and that
guy should NOT be announcing
On 9/13/2010 12:05 PM, William Herrin wrote:
It's a question of double-billing. I've already paid you to send and
receive packets on my behalf. Detuning my packets because a second
party hasn't also paid you is cheating, maybe fraudulent.
Would you object to an ISP model where a content
On 9/14/2010 1:08 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Sep 14, 2010, at 8:47 AM, Dave Sparro wrote:
On 9/13/2010 12:05 PM, William Herrin wrote:
It's a question of double-billing. I've already paid you to send and
receive packets on my behalf. Detuning my packets because a second
party hasn't also
On 9/14/2010 4:02 PM, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
The consumers are saying I want faster, as long as I don't have to pay more.
Content providers are saying, If consumers had faster, I'd be able to invent
'Killer App'. I sure wish the ISPs would upgrade their networks.
ISPs are saying, Why should we
On 5/15/2010 6:38 PM, Graham Freeman wrote:
That may be, but it would surprise me. The carriers still get paid
by virtue of charging the recipients for the SMSes, and in this
particular case cutting off this line of communication
is leaving money on the table, as email-SMS deliverability
On 4/21/2010 8:46 AM, Jim Burwell wrote:
Despite it doing the job it was intended to do, I've always seen NAT
as a bit of an ugly hack, with potential to get even uglier with LSN
and multi-level NAT in the future. I personally welcome a return to a
NAT-less world with IPv6. :)
Don't you
On 2/22/2010 12:40 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
Is it your position that, as a vendor of antispam services, nobody
else should offer their services for a fee?
That would be strange indeed
Actually I can sympathize with Barracuda on this one:
Bob's Widgets is running thier own mail
On 2/17/2010 7:35 PM, John Levine wrote:
We no longer use Spamhaus, relying instead upon Sender Base Reputation
Scores (IronPort).
How does the price compare
Price comparisons would be difficult; with Ironport (Cisco now) you get
hardware to go along with the service.
--
Dave
On 12/15/2009 10:17 AM, Eric J Esslinger wrote:
I found a reference to a null MX proposal, constructed so:
example.comINMX 0 .
Question: Is this a valid dns construct or did the proposal die? I don't want
to cause people problems but at the same time, I don't want any of this crap to
17 matches
Mail list logo
