On Thu, 2004-01-15 at 16:17, Alan Munday wrote:
> Matt/Theo
>
> Yes it did come from the "other" wiki.
>
> This raises the question of how can we learners tell what is no longer valid
> from the custom rule sets?
>
> Also are there any established processes for managing them?
>
It's a wiki. Yo
Chris Santerre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 15 January 2004 21:46
> To: 'Alan Munday'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] FP on MY_HTTP_ODD_PORT
>
>
> We are working on a way to manage the custom rules A LOT
> better. Also we
> will have some of t
lished processes for managing them?
>
> Thanks
>
> Alan
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 15 January 2004 21:13
> > To: Alan Munday; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] FP on MY_HTTP
At Thu Jan 15 20:41:58 2004, Alan Munday wrote:
>
> Just had the mail below trigger on:
>
> 2.0 MY_HTTP_ODD_PORT URI: Link to a server on nonstandard port
>
> Why Vailresorts would want to go to the effort of declaring port 80 in their
> link is a mystery.
>
> However it is clearly not a
r [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 15 January 2004 21:13
> To: Alan Munday; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] FP on MY_HTTP_ODD_PORT
>
>
> At 03:41 PM 1/15/2004, Alan Munday wrote:
> >Just had the mail below trigger on:
> >
> > 2.0 MY_HTTP_ODD_POR
At 03:41 PM 1/15/2004, Alan Munday wrote:
Just had the mail below trigger on:
2.0 MY_HTTP_ODD_PORT URI: Link to a server on nonstandard port
Why Vailresorts would want to go to the effort of declaring port 80 in their
link is a mystery.
However it is clearly not a non-standard port.
Note:
On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 08:41:58PM -, Alan Munday wrote:
> Just had the mail below trigger on:
>
> 2.0 MY_HTTP_ODD_PORT URI: Link to a server on nonstandard port
>
> Why Vailresorts would want to go to the effort of declaring port 80 in their
> link is a mystery.
>
> However it is cle
