I don't blame Len for this behavior...
Neither does Len. Every time ANYBODY tells me what I can and cannot post
in this forum, they're gonna get my response.
I made simple technical post, pointing out 2 problems. Here we see Scott
advising me, as is his reflexive, ideological habit, about
Scott playing gotcha games, qualifying, calling me a liar, contradicting
me, second guessing, puerile one one-up-manship, etc, etc.
I think you forgot FUD spreading and straw man. :)
Seriously, though, I want you to understand that the problem isn't that I
hate you. I'm responding to your
Scott playing gotcha games, qualifying, calling me a liar, contradicting
me, second guessing, puerile one one-up-manship, etc, etc.
I think you forgot FUD spreading and straw man. :)
see etc, etc.
Seriously, though, I want you to understand that the problem isn't that I
hate you.
never said
to be a
regular occurrence (every 3 months or so).
Will
- Original Message -
From: Len Conrad [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 12:07 PM
Subject: RE: Re[2]: [IMail Forum] OT: Primary Name Server
Scott playing gotcha games, qualifying, calling me
AMEN
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Will
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 12:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [IMail Forum] OT: Primary Name Server
How about taking this Off Topic topic, OFF the List. Blast each other via
AMEN
This thread was classic Scott playing gotcha, Len.
Note he hasn't substantiated where I spun/mislead/etc in my 1 (or 2)
short, clear, factual technical posts to the legit topic of this thread.
It's extremely simple, and it's Scott's call. If he doesn't get off my
case, the sh!t
, September 13, 2004 4:05 PM
Subject: RE: Re[2]: [IMail Forum] OT: Primary Name Server
AMEN
This thread was classic Scott playing gotcha, Len.
Note he hasn't substantiated where I spun/mislead/etc in my 1 (or 2)
short, clear, factual technical posts to the legit topic of this thread.
It's
Seriously, though, I want you to understand that the problem isn't that I
hate you. I'm responding to your words, not you.
never said you did. As always, putting words in my mouth.
...
Since when are you the decider of what is accurate, biased, misleading?
Len, I was simply trying to explain
Len, would it be possible for you to step up and take it off-list?
very simple: as long as he keeps his msgs to me public, my responses will
be public.
You keep insisting others do so
but, like you, they don't, so I don't.
Len
Len, I was simply trying to explain why I was responding to your posts
a much better tactic: quit responding to my posts, quit giving me advice
what/how to post to this list, quit sliming me as
misleading/spinmeister/wifebeater.
and trying to make it clear that I don't have anything against
If you were offended, I apologize.
False apology rejected as pure BS just STFU.
I'm sorry you can't accept my apology, Len.
I think for the benefit of the people who have had to put up with this
thread, the best I can offer given the circumstances is that I will try my
best not to respond
: Friday, September 10, 2004 9:43 AM
To: Len Conrad
Subject: Re[2]: [IMail Forum] OT: Primary Name Server
On Friday, September 10, 2004, 12:08:11 PM, Len wrote:
LC no surprise, second guess my posts here, and if you had a clue what
LC I was talking about, you'd be embarrassed at how stupid
Title: OT: Primary Name Server
Sorry for the OT post..but I have a question concerning DNS and primary nameservers
I have just had a conversation with someone at Network Solutions who has advised me that what I thought was our primary nameserver, the machine I have been editing my zone
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [IMail Forum] OT: Primary
Name Server
Sorry
for the OT post..but I have a question concerning DNS and primary
nameservers
I
have just had a conversation with someone at Network Solutions who has advised
me that what I thought was our primary nameserver, the machine I
.
- Original Message -
From: Sharyn
Schmidt
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 9:05 AM
Subject: [IMail Forum] OT: Primary Name Server
Sorry for the OT post..but I have a question
concerning DNS and primary nameserversÂ…
I have just had a conversation with someone at
Network
I have just had a conversation with someone at Network Solutions who has
advised me that what I thought was our primary nameserver, the machine I
have been editing my zone files on for almost 2 years now, is not.
Step 1: Dump Network Solutions, unless you have a good reason to use
them. If
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Sharyn Schmidt
Sent: Friday,
September 10, 2004 6:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [IMail Forum] OT: Primary
Name Server
Sorry
for the OT post..but I have a question concerning DNS and primary
nameservers
I
have just had a conversation
Scott,
Where did you find ns89.worldnic.com and ns90.worldnic.com? Do you know
something about ns28/29.durocom.com?
Darin.
- Original Message -
From: R. Scott Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] OT: Primary
listed properly).
-Joe
- Original Message -
From:
Travis Rabe
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 8:13
AM
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] OT: Primary
Name Server
http://www.dnsreport.com/tools/dnsreport.ch?domain=todhunter.com
ItÂ’s ns2
Where did you find ns89.worldnic.com and ns90.worldnic.com? Do you know
something about ns28/29.durocom.com?
That is strange -- I can't reproduce it now. It looks like there was some
glitch somewhere. It's now showing ns1.secondary.com, ns2.secondary.com,
ns2.todhunter.com, ns28.durocom.com,
http://www.dnsreport.com/tools/dnsreport.ch?domain=todhunter.comhttp://www.dnsreport.com/tools/dnsreport.ch?domain=todhunter.com
It's ns2.todhunter.com
the soa has mname field as ns2.todhunter.com, but that field is manually
edited (errors), and not a technical proof that the primary is ns2 and
Forum] OT: Primary Name Server
Where did you find ns89.worldnic.com and ns90.worldnic.com? Do you know
something about ns28/29.durocom.com?
That is strange -- I can't reproduce it now. It looks like there was some
glitch somewhere. It's now showing ns1.secondary.com, ns2.secondary.com,
ns2
What you use as your primary nameserver does not have to be what your
registrar thinks is your primary nameserver.
Actually, to be a bit more technical, the registrar keeps a list of NS
records -- but does not distinguish between them in any way. So the *only*
way a registrar will know which
What you use as your primary nameserver does not have to be what your
registrar thinks is your primary nameserver. Many people use a nameserver
not listed at the registrar as their primary.
registrar/whois information do not show or define which NS is master or
slave, only the list of NS
Title: Message
Its ns2.todhunter.com
Thanks, I forget that they pay network solution
employees minimum wage.
That is what it's supposed to
be.
That's what I was getting but I'm half brain dead
from these hurricanes and wanted someone else to check.
That is strange -- I can't reproduce it now. It looks like there was some
glitch somewhere. It's now showing ns1.secondary.com, ns2.secondary.com,
ns2.todhunter.com, ns28.durocom.com, and ns29.durocom.com (with the primary
being ns2.secondary.com per the SOA record).
I finally was able to
ns2.todhunter.com has security vulnerability with unrestricted zone transfers:
Len, if you believe that someone has a security vulnerability that is
designed for gathering potentially sensitive information:
todhunter.com. 3600IN SOA ns2.todhunter.com.
manages to anger a few clients, that's inevitable...
knocking on wood, they've never done that to me.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sharyn Schmidt
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 9:24 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] OT
Please do tell what is so horrible with NetSol?
Here is my list:
1. They are too expensive
2. They consistently try to push through rules and regulations that are bad
for the Internet and their competitors but are good for them
3. They try to deceive customers and ex-customers into believing
Please do tell what is so horrible with NetSol?
Here is my list:
1. They are too expensive
2. They consistently try to push through rules and regulations that are bad
for the Internet and their competitors but are good for them
3. They try to deceive customers and ex-customers into believing
ns2.todhunter.com has security vulnerability with unrestricted zone
transfers:
Len, if you believe that someone has a security vulnerability that is
designed for gathering potentially sensitive information:
no surprise, second guess my posts here, and if you had a clue what I was
talking
ns2.todhunter.com has security vulnerability with unrestricted zone
transfers:
Len, if you believe that someone has a security vulnerability that is
designed for gathering potentially sensitive information:
no surprise, second guess my posts here, and if you had a clue what I was
talking
11:08 AM
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] OT: Primary Name Server
ns2.todhunter.com has security vulnerability with unrestricted zone
transfers:
Len, if you believe that someone has a security vulnerability that is
designed for gathering potentially sensitive information:
no surprise, second
On Friday, September 10, 2004, 12:08:11 PM, Len wrote:
LC no surprise, second guess my posts here, and if you had a clue what I was
LC talking about, you'd be embarrassed at how stupid and ignorant you look
LC with you post total BS like this. But like, like our shrub-in-chief,
LC you're too
Len,
I don't mean to come between you and Scott's regular disagreements but I
for one generally consider that the phrase security vulnerability would
concern sensitive information.
I would also venture to guess that Scott probably knows the vulnerability
you are referring to but chose to use
Many, many people consider zone transfers to be a security risk.
duh, that's why I mentioned it.
Until you state otherwise, I still am assuming that you are referring to
the generic implied risk involved with zone transfers.
There are two risks, one real, and one that has been essentially
Well said, Pete.
Darin.
- Original Message -
From: Pete McNeil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Len Conrad [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 12:42 PM
Subject: Re[2]: [IMail Forum] OT: Primary Name Server
On Friday, September 10, 2004, 12:08:11 PM, Len wrote:
LC no surprise
]: [IMail Forum] OT: Primary Name Server
On Friday, September 10, 2004, 12:08:11 PM, Len wrote:
LC no surprise, second guess my posts here, and if you had a clue what I
was
LC talking about, you'd be embarrassed at how stupid and ignorant you look
LC with you post total BS like this. But like, like our
Of Len Conrad
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 9:08 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] OT: Primary Name Server
ns2.todhunter.com has security vulnerability with unrestricted zone
transfers:
Len, if you believe that someone has a security vulnerability that is
designed
Is this kind of thing really necessary?
Since when does necessity, as defined by whomever, have anything to do
with this list?
Use the Delete key, Pete.
Or better yet, don't respond on list, take it up with me off-list.
Len
_
I don't mean to come between you and Scott's regular disagreements but I
for one generally consider that the phrase security vulnerability would
concern sensitive information.
Expand your consideration to include denial of servic attack as a
security vulnerability.
ie, (I hate to spell this
Expand your consideration to include denial of servic attack as a
security vulnerability.
ie, (I hate to spell this basic stuff out, sorry if you know it).
No need to hate doing it -- it needed to be done. Thank you for explaining
the problem.
I personally treat this as either a my pipe is
LEN, SHUT THE H**L UP WITH THE AGREESIVE TONE OF YOUR RESPONCES!
My response to the topic of this thread was stating facts, and pointing out
two problems with her zone file.
BUT
Scott, as is his reflex, just had to try call me out, and he was dead wrong.
( btw, when I posted my original
On Friday, September 10, 2004, 1:55:39 PM, Len wrote:
Is this kind of thing really necessary?
LC Since when does necessity, as defined by whomever, have anything to do
LC with this list?
LC Use the Delete key, Pete.
LC Or better yet, don't respond on list, take it up with me off-list.
off
On Friday, September 10, 2004, 15:30:06, Pete McNeil wrote:
On Friday, September 10, 2004, 1:55:39 PM, Len wrote:
LC Or better yet, don't respond on list, take it up with me off-list.
off list then.
Aw gee... and here I just went and popped a bowl of popcorn to sit back
and enjoy the show :-(
45 matches
Mail list logo
