On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:36:07 EDT, Jim Popovitch said: > > 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?
Because there is no "Your kloo must be this tall to ride the Internet" sign posted.
pgpdir3Ooor7n.pgp
Description: PGP signature
