On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Jason J. W. Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm subscribed to both now. ;-) The advantage to the NANOG subject
> header was obviously it was resilient to e-mail address changes for the
> list. A nice attribute given e-mails now come in from both
> nanog@nanog
ey
Cc: nanog; nanog-futures
Subject: Re: [Nanog-futures] Announce list: Re: Hughes Network
Joe Abley wrote:
>
> On 22 May 2008, at 23:16, James R. Cutler wrote:
>
>> The announcement was made to nanog-announce, but not to nanog. I
>> would expect that there are scads more read
On May 23, 2008, at 9:59 AM, Sam Stickland wrote:
Joe Abley wrote:
On 22 May 2008, at 23:16, James R. Cutler wrote:
The announcement was made to nanog-announce, but not to nanog. I
would expect that there are scads more readers of nanog than of
nanog announce.
When I was sending things
On Fri, 23 May 2008 14:59:15 +0100
Sam Stickland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kinda makes you wonder what the purpose on the announce list is though.
> Are there actually people subscribed to nanog-annouce that aren't
> subscribed to nanog?
Perhaps not but it could be useful anyway. People may
Joe Abley wrote:
On 22 May 2008, at 23:16, James R. Cutler wrote:
The announcement was made to nanog-announce, but not to nanog. I
would expect that there are scads more readers of nanog than of nanog
announce.
When I was sending things to nanog-announce, it was the case that mail
to nanog
On 22 May 2008, at 23:16, James R. Cutler wrote:
The announcement was made to nanog-announce, but not to nanog. I
would expect that there are scads more readers of nanog than of
nanog announce.
When I was sending things to nanog-announce, it was the case that mail
to nanog-announce was s
Once upon a time, wasn't nanog@ subscribed to nanog-announce@ ? It
appears to not be now.
I went looking in my archives for that message-id; the only copy of
that mail I got was from you, and I am on both -futures and the main list.
Thanks for sending that along, Jim.
Everyone,
The main nanog list is subscribed to nanog-announce. So everything sent
to nanog-announce should appear on the nanog list too.
If folks choose to unsubscribe from the nanog list, they will need to
subscribe to nanog-announce to carry on seeing announcements.
Hope this clarifies at
The announcement was made to nanog-announce, but not to nanog. I would
expect that there are scads more readers of nanog than of nanog
announce.
For some, that could cause unexpected results, especially with the 24
hour notice.
Corroborative detail below. (Oops, top posting)
Regards.
On
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 9:35 PM, someone wrote:
> Add me to the list of never-saw-that. In addition, I just checked the
> nanog archives, and there isn't an announcement of that type in the
> archives.
Below is the full email, with headers, from Monday. Hopefully it will
put this issue to rest...
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 3:47 PM
To: nanog
Subject: Re: Hughes Network
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Jason J. W. Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has anyone else noticed that the [NANOG] prefix has been missing
> intermittently from the list traffic over the last couple of days?
Popovitch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 3:47 PM
To: nanog
Subject: Re: Hughes Network
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Jason J. W. Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has anyone else noticed that the [NANOG] prefix has been missing
> intermittently from the list
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Jason J. W. Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has anyone else noticed that the [NANOG] prefix has been missing
> intermittently from the list traffic over the last couple of days?
This was planned, and then announced approx 5 days ago. You are
subscribed to na
Has anyone else noticed that the [NANOG] prefix has been missing
intermittently from the list traffic over the last couple of days?
Different SMTP servers, it appears (looks like they might have been
using an Ironport box to do anti-spam, and it was probably doing the
subject re-writes as
]
-Original Message-
From: rar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 10:04 AM
To: Joe Blanchard; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Hughes Network
I have tried everything I can think of to get good technical support
from Hughesnet. I sent a Fed Ex package outlining a problem to the
I have tried everything I can think of to get good technical support
from Hughesnet. I sent a Fed Ex package outlining a problem to the
President. Never heard a word. The people in India where a nightmare.
I worked with one of their sales reps and no satisfaction.
If you find anyone who can h
16 matches
Mail list logo
