So Cox subs can reach out to you when we're having saturation issues? :) Having been around for the beginnings of cable modem tech at @home networks in the 90's dealing with almost every big MSO (Cox, Comcast, ATT, Intermedia, etc), I like to talk about the tech as a bit proud where it's gone. I liked Cox as one of the last decent hold-outs for things like keeping Usenet around longer than they should, not killing customers for mpaa/riaa abuse complaints, and keeping data caps off when the industry was moving in that direction, so I think they're better than the rest, but eventually they hopped on the money train with data caps too. And now they're paying for their pro-pirate stance as well with lawsuits against them winning <https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/legal-and-management/8546842/cox-1-billion-piracy-lawsuit-labels-publishers>, probably using that extra cap revenue to pay the trolls.
Would I go back? Not as long as they have data caps, and someone else around me doesn't, but yes - much better network. I don't like random overages in my bill, I get that enough with power. If I thought the covid restrictions to remove caps would hold, I'd probably switch back now, but I'm sure they'll find a reason to reimplement them asap as that's lost revenue on your rsu's. It's always good to hear from other docsis speakers, welcome back! -mb On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 6:54 PM Thomas Scott <mr.thomas.sc...@gmail.com> wrote: > Day job is for a certain ISP HQ in Atlanta that supplies internet for a > lot of the valley - I work in Network Operations first in Phoenix and now > in Atlanta, and was surprised to see so much of what I talk about everyday > in PLUG! > > CLink trying to play FTTN as FTTH, nothing new there. I live in a > neighborhood outside of Atlanta that had some AT&T brownfield development > for FTTH, and I've had no regrets (300 up 300 down!) Cox is moving towards > "10G" with DOCSIS 4.0 and they are getting fiber closer to the home with > their node splits. If you find that you all off a sudden have an extra hop > in your path, that might be the seen you've been on one of those nodes that > have been lit and split. The amount of bandwidth going up and down will go > up dramatically. > > @Michael - yeah I don't think the caps are going anywhere, the industry as > a whole (driven by big red) has moved that direction, but I think you'll > see speeds and caps rise as N+0 goes to full duplex DOCSIS. I do know > they've been relaxed with the COVID-19 FCC initiatives, but how long that > lasts, I'm not sure. > > @Mac - the cox supplied modems are almost all going to "Panoramic Wi-Fi" > and the number of holes found in DOCSIS devices is... disturbing to say the > least. It was designed to be operated on a shared RF medium, and like other > "trusting" protocols (i.e. BGP) has a lot of issues. The more virtualized > it becomes, I think we'll see more of those go away - the smaller the > broadcast domains, and the smaller the first upstream router, the better > those will be able to be maintained and automated. Looking at the road > maps, it will be interesting what comes next. > > - Thomas Scott | mr.thomas.sc...@gmail.com <mr.thomas.sc...@gmail.com> > > > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 3:54 PM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss < > plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: > >> Oddly enough, the model number of your router stuck in my head, the >> C3000Z, and I realized I used the same thing, but for my 150mbps dsl >> modem. You sure you have actual gig fiber? They tend to misrepresent >> their actual products in sales. Ask me how I know. >> >> <tldr> >> >> I say this because I called CL before going to them, and asked if I could >> get fiber in the network. They said yes. Hmm, I knew damn well they did >> not, as no one wants to build fiber into old peoria neighborhoods such as >> mine. After some conversation and calling him out, he explained that "oh, >> it's a gigabit network", just not fiber to your house. I could get >> dual-band DSL, which means 75mbps x2, for a total of 150mbps, delivered by >> a gigabit network! I sort of facepalmed, but ordered it anyways as it was >> significantly more than I had with cox (80mbps at the time I think), >> significantly cheaper, and no bandwidth cap. >> >> If there is anything other than fiber directly in your modem, I'd call >> bullocks, but FTTH is a myth to me. >> >> Crappier service, but I'll take the (usually) cheap and fast. It is most >> certainly not gigabit fiber to my house, even though that's what they tried >> to sell me I was getting. Only new house/community builds get fiber, and >> if even that. Cox did the same to compete with Google fiber, and as soon >> as Google Fiber died, so did Cox ever mentioning fiber again. Truth is Cox >> doesn't need it, shielded coax can deliver soon 10g over it just fine with >> new modulation schemas and docsis improvements. Centurylink's 100 year old >> 2-8 wire infrastructure cannot, all they can do is build new with fiber, >> but they probably won't being decrepit. >> >> I hear friends of mine mention they have fiber, and wonder just if they >> really do. This is why Google Fiber folded, it was unrealistic unless a >> net-new community build. Google fiber retrofits were a disaster >> <https://gizmodo.com/when-google-fiber-abandons-your-city-as-a-failed-experi-1833244198> >> . >> >> Fun-fact: Oddly enough the guy that built Google Fiber, Milo Medin, is >> the same guy that started @Home Networks back in late 90's for Cable Modem >> services, and pioneered current industry standards in use today globally to >> deliver cable internet. The last-mile regional MSO providers snuffed >> him/company back then, took it over themselves, and then they snuffed him >> out again as he tried the same incursion with Google Fiber, and realized it >> just cost too damn much to compete. Cable Monopolies, flawless victory. >> >> Next I expect he'll team up with Elon or Bezos to try again via >> terrestrial. >> >> -mb >> >> >> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 10:32 AM Michael Butash <mich...@butash.net> >> wrote: >> >>> I tend to find the CL network a bit wonky, having moved to DSL from Cox >>> (damn bandwidth caps). I find the general performance is worse than cox, >>> where I suspect they simply don't manage the bandwidth and are far too >>> oversubscribed as it feels like the internet buffers at times, literally. >>> Cox would occasionally get that way too, and it was easy to see in an >>> ongoing MTR when their peering in LA would get slammed and latency would >>> jump (not to mention I know the guys that manage that bandwidth, telling >>> them often got it fixed). Oddly Using MTR with CL, they filter icmp/udp >>> specifically that seems to hide responses to track well. Go figure, truth >>> hurts, so hide it. >>> >>> Having worked for service providers numerous times over the years, >>> working in and building them, routers are always an issue in a metro city >>> or even interstate networks. No two platforms are ever the same, whether >>> buying all Cisco, Juniper, Nokia, or any combo of all and more, which as >>> you said, many do. Hardest part is usually capacity planning, particularly >>> with something like covid, every isp took a kick in the groin at the same >>> time to augment their networks, suddenly by some magnitude, when everyone >>> else in the world is doing the same. Slowness in networking can often be >>> attributed to those not having enough capacity, though they'll never admit >>> it. >>> >>> I'm on the 150mbps dsl, and a speed test can provide that for sure, but >>> general usage, which I use a lot of tabs and apps, tends to bring things to >>> a crawl often. I'd even go back to cox if they got rid of the bandwidth >>> cap. CL might as well be government, and they're run by unions, so nothing >>> happens fast, including capacity augments. >>> >>> Re: mac limits, having been around Cox both as a customer and network >>> engineer working there early 2000's, the mac security was more about >>> limiting the amount of hosts behind a modem that could be allowed to a >>> single mac and IP address. Back Circa 1998 I had my first Cox modem, and >>> there were no routers, you just got yourself a phat 10baset switch from >>> computer city and connected up your family on public ip addresses, each >>> with their own mac and ip's. With no limits or filters that led to >>> security issues (hey, I see my neighbor's c drive shared!), Cox and others >>> then pushed people to then buy a router, which by then around 2002, you >>> could buy a cheap wrt54g linksys. The advent of docsis also allowed to >>> both filter and restrict the macs by default, also let them reduce to now >>> 1:1 IP to User ratio, which was good for ip management, the abuse >>> departments, and fbi warrants from legal. You used to be able to buy >>> another ip, they'd push a new docsis config with mac-alowed=2, but not >>> anymore. >>> >>> Same reasons they're just building in the router functions now, it >>> ensures they can offer some basic customer security, plus lets them run >>> whatever spyware in their embedded router os they want. Better off buying >>> your own standalone modem and router combo, one you ideally trust. >>> >>> -mb >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:07 PM Donald Mac McCarthy via PLUG-discuss < >>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Putting a CL modem into a bridge mode where it only handles the PPPoE >>>> connection is simply checking a radial select button and hitting apply. If >>>> your firewall supports PPoE, even better, as you no longer need their Modem >>>> and router in the mix. But, that is just my experience, and it is limited. >>>> I have a CL fiber to the door drop, and they gave me a Zyxel C3000Z device >>>> for connection. I promptly ripped it out and allowed pfSense to maintain >>>> the PPPoE connection. I had to call support for packet loss one time, and >>>> they refused to help me. So goes it rolling your own I guess. Turns out a >>>> day later we had a several hour outage due to one of the multiplexing cards >>>> used to distribute the 40Gb/s core fiber to the GPON devices failed. Seems >>>> like that was a likely culprit for some of the packet loss the previous >>>> day. >>>> >>>> Having just gotten off a call in which the Senior Director of Security >>>> Architecture and Engineering (a friend of mine from Atlanta) for Cox was a >>>> participant, before he hung up I asked him about the typical Cox supplied >>>> modems. Very, very few of them are purely bridge devices - especially with >>>> the push to "Panoramic WiFi". A member of CentryLink who was also on the >>>> call (ISP InfoSec sharing/working group) mentioned how painful it was to >>>> support the number of company issued modems/gateway/router models there are >>>> for different infrastructure and connections - let alone ones that >>>> customers buy and bring to the party. BTW, the MAC address thing is because >>>> they do actually use a MAC locking like feature for security. Apparently it >>>> is bad for the network if you just go plug your modem in at several houses >>>> in the neighborhood due to the way DOCSIS works. I still have to dig into >>>> that and ask some more questions on that one. >>>> >>>> There was a collective groan among the engineers when another ISP spoke >>>> up about the number of critical flaws they find in their DOCIS devices each >>>> year. >>>> >>>> With the amount of consolidation which has happened in the past 20 >>>> years in the broadband market, the landscape is riddled with legacy bits >>>> and pieces of this provider and that provider somehow being coerced into >>>> working together to accomplish passing traffic. One of the ISPs mentioned >>>> they had no less than 350 different models of core switching equipment made >>>> by more than a dozen manufacturers in their network. They have a team of 40 >>>> (really 5 teams of 8) that simply monitor and ensure that the OSPF >>>> functions properly among the various models and brands to make sure that >>>> the network properly heals/manages congestion. >>>> >>>> Anyway, just throwing it out so that people can see and understand the >>>> picture at a higher level. The final comment on the call was from an >>>> engineer at a midwestern rural provider and one that I am sure many of us >>>> can relate to. She said she spends all day pulling her hair out trying to >>>> keep the network functioning at the highest of levels. The first words out >>>> of her kids' mouths when she gets home are "Mom, the WiFi seems slow >>>> today." >>>> >>>> I talked with Alexander this afternoon, and it looks like he has a >>>> functioning network again. The APs were reluctant to give up their old >>>> configuration, so a factory reset and new DHCP leases seem to have done the >>>> trick. >>>> >>>> Hopefully this sheds a bit of light on something for a few people. >>>> >>>> Mac >>>> >>>> >>>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/4/20 4:59 PM: >>>> >>>> Ideally when you plug into a cable modem, it comes up, and passes your >>>> ethernet to the cmts in a bridge, lets one mac address dhcp/arp, and things >>>> work. It learns that one ip/mac, and disallows any other mac. No >>>> security, nat, nothing, just real dumb dhcp + default routing with a public >>>> ip. Routers/firewalls try to NAT you, thus double NAT if using a router >>>> behind it. >>>> >>>> CL sells you a dsl modem/router that does your local security whether >>>> you want it or not, full router/nat/firewall, and probably spyware. Making >>>> it a modem is possible, but takes work, and your firewall has to support >>>> PPPoE (not all can/do). Last time I touched a combo Cox router/modem, I >>>> didn't see any way to do so. I told them to buy a real modem, and that >>>> worked with their belkin/cisco/linksys/netgear they had. >>>> >>>> If your "modem" mentions wifi, it's a router/firewall, not a modem. >>>> Not all are clear about this, as they dumb it down for consumers, but an >>>> important point. >>>> >>>> -mb >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:53 PM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss < >>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I Owned a Nighthawk Router/Modem combo, The way that Netgear handled >>>>> that is that the modem was hard-wired to a bridge on the router side. and >>>>> technically you could see it as a separate device in the router configs if >>>>> you rooted around enough. but the modem side was just a modem. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:03 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss < >>>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Cox modems *are* bridges first and foremost typically, unless you get >>>>>> a bundled router/modem, which is only what CenturyLink sells. If you >>>>>> got a >>>>>> "router/modem" combo, just buy a modem-only device for a dumb bridge and >>>>>> simple ethernet for a public ip. I recommend staying with an arris cable >>>>>> modem, originally motorola, they basically developed cable modem docsis, >>>>>> and are always the best. >>>>>> >>>>>> I moved from Cox to CL when Cox started adding a usage cap, and that >>>>>> was new to me to get my Fortinet firewall online with CL and their DSL >>>>>> doing PPPOE. I've seen the router/cable modem combo boxes later, but >>>>>> never >>>>>> owned one as I always have my own router/firewall. >>>>>> >>>>>> -mb >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 8:36 AM Donald Mac McCarthy <m...@oscontext.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Will Cox allow for a bridge/virtual bridge mode? Xfinity does, which >>>>>>> allows you to put in a firewall, and use the modem only as a gateway, >>>>>>> therefore preventing a double NAT situation. Never lived in a Cox area >>>>>>> before, and currently ride CL fiber. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Mac >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/3/20 2:00 PM: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cox modems will learn and allow only 1 mac at a time (unless >>>>>>> business is set to allow more, but not on residential). If switching >>>>>>> out >>>>>>> firewalls, I 99% of time reboot the modem first and foremost. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 12:08 PM Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss >>>>>>> <plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I got it working. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I assigned the SFP+ port as my LAN and assigned it the 10.x.x.x/16 >>>>>>>> network. Then I had to call COX and list the WAN Mac address with them. >>>>>>>> Upon doing so I was able to reach external sites, and all downstream >>>>>>>> devices started coming alive! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for all the suggestions and help! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> Alexander >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my Galaxy S10+ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020, 03:14 Herminio Hernandez, Jr. via PLUG-discuss >>>>>>>> <plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Can you login to the FW via the LAN interface? Can you ping the >>>>>>>>> FW LAN interface? Check the routing and NAT policy on the FW. All >>>>>>>>> outbound >>>>>>>>> traffic should NAT to the FW WAN interface and there should be a >>>>>>>>> default ( >>>>>>>>> 0.0.0.0/0) route to the internet. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 7:27 PM Seabass via PLUG-discuss < >>>>>>>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm with Mac, I think it is not the firewall, but if you have the >>>>>>>>>> ability to plug it into a display with a keyboard, you can use that >>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>> configuration and modify a different device at the same time. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Makes it easier to troubleshoot by giving you the ability to >>>>>>>>>> configure your pfSense ports at the same time. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Message: 2 >>>>>>>>>> Date: Sat, 2 May 2020 09:04:35 -0700 >>>>>>>>>> From: Donald Mac McCarthy <m...@oscontext.com> >>>>>>>>>> To: "Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss" >>>>>>>>>> <plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: pfSense + Ubiquity >>>>>>>>>> Message-ID: <18adfa38-3e72-7b0a-e31a-1ddf175d7...@oscontext.com> >>>>>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I can help - but I am unavailable to do so until tomorrow. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Make sure there are not any thing other than default VLANs on the >>>>>>>>>> interfaces to start with. Ubiquiti is famous for not havinght >>>>>>>>>> eSFP+ >>>>>>>>>> ports active in the default configuration, and I believe the >>>>>>>>>> switch has >>>>>>>>>> all the ports to shutdown on default config as well. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I think it is the switch not passing traffic through - no the >>>>>>>>>> firewall. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Mac >>>>>>>>>> Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/2/20 8:53 AM: >>>>>>>>>> > Does anyone out there have experience with pfSence and Ubiquity >>>>>>>>>> switches? >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > I have zero with either but that didn't stop me from buying >>>>>>>>>> both .... >>>>>>>>>> > how hard could it be?! LOL. >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > I bought a Negate XG-1537-1U. I bought a Unifi Pro 24 PoE >>>>>>>>>> switch. >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > I can configure the FW immediately after >>>>>>>>>> > firstboot/restore-default-configs, but only if i set the LAN >>>>>>>>>> interface >>>>>>>>>> > to be the cable that goes directly to my laptop. That's great, >>>>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>>>> > that does shit for the downstream switch. >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > I have a 10GB SFP+ Port that I want to configure as the >>>>>>>>>> downstream >>>>>>>>>> > port to ubiquity, but any configuration other than mentioned >>>>>>>>>> above >>>>>>>>>> > fails .... and I'm now on my 12th "Reset To Factory Defaults" >>>>>>>>>> ... any >>>>>>>>>> > help on this would be greatly appreciated! >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> > Alexander >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > Sent from my Galaxy S10+ >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>> > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>> > https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy >>>>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations >>>>>>>>>> Open Source Context >>>>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445 >>>>>>>>>> m...@oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>> https://oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>> -------------- next part -------------- >>>>>>>>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >>>>>>>>>> URL: < >>>>>>>>>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20200502/aeab14b4/attachment-0001.html >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Digest Footer >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> End of PLUG-discuss Digest, Vol 179, Issue 2 >>>>>>>>>> ******************************************** >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail >>>>>>> settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy >>>>>>> Director, Field Operations >>>>>>> Open Source Context >>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445 >>>>>>> m...@oscontext.com >>>>>>> https://oscontext.com >>>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from >>>>> rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button. >>>>> >>>>> Stephen >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail >>>> settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy >>>> Director, Field Operations >>>> Open Source Context >>>> +1.602.584.4445 >>>> m...@oscontext.com >>>> https://oscontext.com >>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------- >> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > >
--------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss