>I think you could reasonable argue that the above clause does not cover NAT. >Note that no computer behind the NAT box is actually 'connected' to the >service - rather the NAT machine is relaying requests of the machines not >connected. Ah... That argument is so thin it's anorexic...:-) -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
- RE: [SLUG] Re: Telstra ADSL RIP-OFF John Wiltshire
- RE: [SLUG] Re: Telstra ADSL RIP-OFF Jon Biddell
- RE: [SLUG] Re: Telstra ADSL RIP-OFF John Wiltshire
- RE: [SLUG] Re: Telstra ADSL RIP-OFF Jon Biddell
- RE: [SLUG] Re: Telstra ADSL RIP-OFF Nelson
- RE: [SLUG] Re: Telstra ADSL RIP-OFF Jon Biddell
- RE: [SLUG] Re: Telstra ADSL RIP-OFF Jon Biddell
- Re: [SLUG] M$ signs deal with Hoover ... Jon Biddell
- RE: [SLUG] Re: Telstra ADSL RIP-OFF Jon Biddell
- RE: [SLUG] Re: Telstra ADSL RIP-OFF Jon Biddell
- Re: [SLUG] Re: Telstra ADSL RIP-OFF Stuart Cooper
- Re: [SLUG] Re: Telstra ADSL RIP-OFF Jon Biddell
