I'm under the impression that I either missed something, or that most
people understand that the blootbot maintained by Tim Riker is, at
least in our channels (#utah, #utos, #ubuntu-utah, #uphpu, etc),
indeed *is* a girl.
I got this impression from several macros and other things. The
question
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 07:57 -0600, Clint Savage wrote:
I'm under the impression that I either missed something, or that most
people understand that the blootbot maintained by Tim Riker is, at
least in our channels (#utah, #utos, #ubuntu-utah, #uphpu, etc),
indeed *is* a girl.
I got this
This is for any iptables and networking gurus out there. I have a
server that sits on both the BYU private and public network. The one
NIC is on a 10.x.x.x/24 network, and the other is on the 128.187.x.x/24
network. This is, of course a bit of a problem, because there can be
only one default
Andrew McNabb wrote:
If I were designing the BYU network, I would give everything 128.187
addresses, and I would use a novel tool called a firewall to limit
outside access to private machines. I guess that makes me a heretic
That's how it was in 1997 when I had a PC on the BYU resnet, well
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 10:49 -0500, Andrew McNabb wrote:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 08:58:59AM -0600, Michael L Torrie wrote:
If I was designing the BYU network, I would have made public address
translate to private addresses, and split the DNS. That way the world
would see servers on the
It shall never be eradicated, since everyone insists on the ipv4 concept
and even several of the paths to ipv6 include the use of a NAT for your
legacy stuff.
It is a scourge that too many embrace to eliminate.
-Steve
Corey Edwards wrote:
Heretic, maybe, but it also makes you sane. NAT is
On 10/16/07, Corey Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 07:57 -0600, Clint Savage wrote:
I'm under the impression that I either missed something, or that most
people understand that the blootbot maintained by Tim Riker is, at
least in our channels (#utah, #utos,
Steven Alligood wrote:
It shall never be eradicated, since everyone insists on the ipv4 concept
and even several of the paths to ipv6 include the use of a NAT for your
legacy stuff.
Sure, but the IPv6 stuff is actually quite cool. You can, for example,
map an IPv6 address to each of your
On 9/26/07, Sterling Jacobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you talking about the American Fork City FTTN Ethernet network?
The American Fork system is quite different from the Utopia/iProvo system.
It was the old Airswitch network and it shows it's age every time a storm
comes up. And it
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 08:58 -0600, Michael L Torrie wrote:
This is for any iptables and networking gurus out there. I have a
server that sits on both the BYU private and public network. The one
NIC is on a 10.x.x.x/24 network, and the other is on the 128.187.x.x/24
network. This is, of
Clint Savage wrote:
I'm under the impression that I either missed something, or that most
people understand that the blootbot maintained by Tim Riker is, at
least in our channels (#utah, #utos, #ubuntu-utah, #uphpu, etc),
indeed *is* a girl.
I got this impression from several macros and
Lonnie Olson wrote:
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 08:58 -0600, Michael L Torrie wrote:
This is for any iptables and networking gurus out there. I have a
server that sits on both the BYU private and public network. The one
NIC is on a 10.x.x.x/24 network, and the other is on the 128.187.x.x/24
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 12:19 -0600, Lonnie Olson wrote:
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 08:58 -0600, Michael L Torrie wrote:
This is for any iptables and networking gurus out there. I have a
server that sits on both the BYU private and public network. The one
NIC is on a 10.x.x.x/24 network, and the
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 13:05 -0600, Michael L Torrie wrote:
I'm sure a packet would make it back to the requesting computer, even if
it was going out the wrong interface. However, the calling computer
would likely discard it, since it's not coming from the same ip address
as the original
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 13:05 -0600, Michael L Torrie wrote:
I'm sure a packet would make it back to the requesting computer, even if
it was going out the wrong interface. However, the calling computer
would likely discard it, since it's not coming from the same ip address
as the original
Whats the pay look like?
On 10/16/07, Daniel Sampson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I need a contract programmer. The need is for a 3 month project.
The skills needed are PHP / MySQL / Perl / HTML-CSS. The other big
skill needed is the ability to go on site and listen to high end
executives and
Airswitch the name sure brings back memories doesn't it?
Take a look at what I found...
http://www.isp-planet.com/profiles/airswitch.html
On 10/16/07, Matthew Frederico [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/26/07, Sterling Jacobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you talking about the American Fork
Corey Edwards wrote:
Example routing table:
Destination Genmask Gateway Iface
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 128.187.0.1 eth0
128.187.0.0 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.0 eth0
10.2.0.0 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.0 eth1
10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.2.0.1
Corey Edwards wrote:
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 10:49 -0500, Andrew McNabb wrote:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 08:58:59AM -0600, Michael L Torrie wrote:
If I was designing the BYU network, I would have made public address
translate to private addresses, and split the DNS. That way the world
would see
On 10/5/07, Andrew Jorgensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's probably another way to do this. Maybe I'll look into pulling
from vnc for flumotion.
Turns out pulling vnc into flumotion should be possible. Thomas
Vander Stichele says he did something very similar with his local X
server:
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 15:19 -0600, Michael L Torrie wrote:
Kenneth Burgener wrote:
Out of curiosity why do you claim NAT is an evil scourge?
Because it breaks the idea of peer-to-peer connections and requires all
kinds of hacks and workarounds to really get functionality.
And it's not just
My understanding was that anything which does not have the plumbing
required for procreation, would inherently be hermaphroditic.
Therefore properly, it, should be an it.
On 10/16/07, Brandon Stout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Clint Savage wrote:
I'm under the impression that I either missed
Um. She's a girl. Haven't you noticed how when guys talk to her, they
stare at her bot and not her i?
Hello! My i's up here!
On 10/16/07, Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My understanding was that anything which does not have the plumbing
required for procreation, would inherently be
30 july 2007 : Looking for a NEW GParted-LiveCD Maintainer !
and still looking.
http://gparted.sourceforge.net/news.php
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 07:06:00PM -0400, Steve wrote:
My understanding was that anything which does not have the plumbing
required for procreation, would inherently be hermaphroditic.
No, it would be asexual, e.g. an amoeba. An hermaphrodite has both sets
of genitalia.
So those of you who
25 matches
Mail list logo
