Actually it does buy us some trust but as the roots aren't signed it's
fairly moot.
On 21/11/2009, Nigel Jones wrote:
> At the moment? Nothing.
>
> On 21/11/2009, Mike McGrath wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Mike McGrath
>>> wrote:
>>
At the moment? Nothing.
On 21/11/2009, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Mike McGrath
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Mike McGrath
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >> >
> >> > So, for example 'fedoraproject.org' wouldn't be signed, but
> >> > 'us.fedo
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
>> >
>> > So, for example 'fedoraproject.org' wouldn't be signed, but
>> > 'us.fedoraproject.org' would be? I *think* that's possible but I
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >
> > So, for example 'fedoraproject.org' wouldn't be signed, but
> > 'us.fedoraproject.org' would be? I *think* that's possible but I haven't
> > gotten it to work. If I can get that to work tho
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
>
> So, for example 'fedoraproject.org' wouldn't be signed, but
> 'us.fedoraproject.org' would be? I *think* that's possible but I haven't
> gotten it to work. If I can get that to work though I guess that makes
> sense because A) it'd work f
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 8:13 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
>> > On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
>> >> > Nothing'
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 8:13 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > > On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Mike McGrath
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > Nothing
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 8:13 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >> > Nothing's ever easy, is it?
> >> >
> >> > So I got pdns up and going t
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> Nothing's ever easy, is it?
>
> So I got pdns up and going this afternoon with it's geo back end. It's
> working as expected and everything is good. The problem is pdns's dnssec
> implementation is... not particularly mature or really even
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Nigel Jones wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Stephen John Smoogen
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 8:13 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
>>> Ugh, I really don't want to have to choose, nb did great work with getting
>>> dnssec going.
>>
>> I would only do it
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 8:13 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
>>> > Nothing's ever easy, is it?
>>> >
>>> > So I got pdns up and g
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 8:13 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
>> > Nothing's ever easy, is it?
>> >
>> > So I got pdns up and going this afternoon with it's geo back end. It's
>> > working as expe
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > Nothing's ever easy, is it?
> >
> > So I got pdns up and going this afternoon with it's geo back end. It's
> > working as expected and everything is good. The problem is pdns's dnssec
> >
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> Nothing's ever easy, is it?
>
> So I got pdns up and going this afternoon with it's geo back end. It's
> working as expected and everything is good. The problem is pdns's dnssec
> implementation is... not particularly mature or really even
Nothing's ever easy, is it?
So I got pdns up and going this afternoon with it's geo back end. It's
working as expected and everything is good. The problem is pdns's dnssec
implementation is... not particularly mature or really even usable AFAIK
with geodns.
Anyone out there doing both geo loca
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Rene Purcell wrote:
> Hi all,
> My name is René Jr Purcell and I'd like to join the Fedora community and I
> think the Infrastructure group is a good place
> to start!
>
> I started using Linux with Slackware 4.0, I remember all those night trying
> to understand this "new w
Hi all,
My name is René Jr Purcell and I'd like to join the Fedora community and I
think the Infrastructure group is a good place to start!
I started using Linux with Slackware 4.0, I remember all those night trying
to understand this "new way of thinking and using computer" I had a lot of
fun and
I saw it during the initial F12 sync and it has been there since.
Adrian
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 06:46:48PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> Are you seeing this regularly or just this one time?
>
> -Mike
>
> On Thu, 19 Nov 2009, Adrian Reber wrote:
>
> > The configuration of
19 matches
Mail list logo
