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.

Interesting. I just realized that I've probably never been subscribed to 
nanog-announce, since all the important stuff was cross-posted to nanog, 
and I didn't see the point of seeing it twice. Now I wonder what else 
I've missed by doing that. Dang. Guess I'll have to go off and sign up, now.

-- 
Die Gedanken sind frei


_______________________________________________
Nanog-futures mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures

Reply via email to