On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, David S. Miller wrote:
>
> Albert D. Cahalan writes:
> > How about some way to test before you do this?
> > Example: an ecn.kernel.org host that replys to mail.
>
> "test"? I know exactly whats going to happen, and unless folks like
> hotmail.com and others get their act together I'll certainly end up
> removing *@*hotmail.com from the lists by the end of that day.
Actually, this is a kick ass idea. How many hotmail addresses on lkml?
This will definitely get the point across. They don't seem to get it from
the email I received. It should have read "Oh, we know about this, but in
order for us to do something, we'd actually have to do work and like
upgrade things and that's a drag. We'd rather watch Benny Hill reruns and
throw snot balls at our enterprise solutions all day" or something to that
effect.
What's funny is I spent two days thinking my segment was banned from
hotmail for some totally unknown reason before the whole ECN thing popped
into my head.
-jeremy
> That is the whole point of this experiment.
>
> Alan plans on doing similar things to ftp.linux.org.uk and other
> machines he maintains.
>
> The behavior of these sites is simply intolerable, and I think
> this is a wonderful way to get our point across. I cannot see it
> being argued that these entities have not been given enough notice
> of the problem. If they cannot be bothered to get fixed an issue like
> this after nearly half a year, I cannot be bothered to feel bad for
> them when all users at their site lose access to the lists.
>
> Later,
> David S. Miller
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
--
this is my sig.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
