On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 12:12 -0400, Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:
> I'm also shocked someone would actually advocate this. I'm
> sure Google wouldn't be too happy to find out about it.
This begs the question... why is the OP trying to do this with DNS
instead of a caching proxy?
-Jim P.
(no
On 18/08/2007, at 3:00 AM, Raymond L. Corbin wrote:
I am shocked this many people responded to this post...
-Ray
Just because something is possible it doesn't mean it should be done.
It really is a Bad Idea (tm) to do stuff like falsifying DNS entries
and all that kinda nasty stuff. Sur
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Steven Haigh wrote:
>
> On 18/08/2007, at 3:00 AM, Raymond L. Corbin wrote:
> >
> > I am shocked this many people responded to this post...
> >
> > -Ray
> >
>
> Just because something is possible it doesn't mean it should be done.
> It really is a Bad Idea (tm) to do stuff
3 matches
Mail list logo