Re: mail archives (was: Another ACPI anecdote, plus footnotes)
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005, at 12:03pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> http://www.mail-archive.com/gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org/msg08582.html > > The archives from mail-archive.com are regularly purged, and in fact only > go back to 196 days at this instant. According to their FAQ, they keep mail indefinitely. They say they only keep the most recent 3000 msgs in data or thread indexes; is that what you mean? Or are they not working as advertised? -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: mail archives
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005, at 2:05pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/ > > I do like these archives; however I didn't know about them until around 30 > seconds ago. The archives were removed with some fanfare (or, more > precisely, not enough fanfare) a while ago; I don't recall anybody > announcing that they were back. The archives at http://mail.gnhlug.org have, to the best of my knowledge, always been there. They were switched from "public" to "private" some time back with no discussion. The reason was to bypass the email address publication problem. A better solution was desired, but the resources (people, time, trust, server resources, installed software, etc.) did not exist. Likely still do not. Prior to that, when the list was at (all rise) ZK3 (be seated), I have no idea. I believe various personal archives have been fed into web archives at various times, but I don't remember who fed what to where or when. -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: mail archives (was: Another ACPI anecdote, plus footnotes)
On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 03:44:52PM -0500, Tom Buskey wrote: > Seriously, if you can remove all email addresses from the archive, I'd > bet you'd solve 90% of the problems people have with creating an > archive. I'm pretty sure I've historically been the most vocal complainer, and I've followed the arguments pretty closely. I can say that - I have no problem whatever with archives existing - I have no problem with /my/ posts being archived [but see below] - I do not feel that any such archive need be protected by passwords My one single objection has always been to the fact that my e-mail address appears in a public forum which is very easy to harvest, and that this unquestionably leads to an inflation of received spam (i.e. at the mail server, before any filtering). This includes cases of my e-mail address being included in attributions and quotes in other people's posts, which I have no control over. The above 3 statements are true, PROVIDED all references to my e-mail address are removed before inclusion in any such archive. As things stand, purely from the standpoint of self-interest, I no longer care about this issue. The reason for that is the address with which I post is not a valid e-mail address. Mailman allows for certain tricks which facilitate this. From the perspective of my view of how things should be in the universe, I do still think that the archive should not be established unless references to e-mail addresses are removed. However for obvious reasons, I no longer feel the need to argue the point quite so vocally. Actually, I'd like to see this behavior on the physical messages which are sent out by the mailing list software to the subscribers also; but I'm not even going to go there... > The other 10% will beat the topic to death with (a few) real and (many > many many ) hypothetical situations until you give up in frustration. Based on my recollection of the discussions, I believe removing addresses will remove much closer to 100% of the complaints. -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail. Sorry for the inconvenience. Thank the spammers. pgpDuzwbIwecy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: mail archives (was: Another ACPI anecdote, plus footnotes)
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 15:44:52 -0500, Tom Buskey wrote: > > A way around this might be a poll that put the archive idea to a vote, > then go with the majority. Then put that in the charter so we can end > these debates by pointing at the charter. I'd like the archive. However, would gmane be a better alternative? http://www.gmane.org/ -- Jeff Macdonald Ayer, MA ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Sound card recommendations?
On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 10:23:42PM -0500, Benjamin Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So now I'm looking for a card that (1) works and (2) is made by a company > which is at least not hostile to their customers. I suspect I'm dreaming, > but hey, at least it's a Linux-related dream. ;-) A long time ago (maybe 5.5 years?), when I way looking for a card with S/PDIF output (which at the time was fairly rare, and before Creative was (temporarily) co-operative), I ran across Trident Microsystems and their 4DWave-series chipsets, included on boards like the one I bought, a Hoontech SoundTrack 4DWave-NX. This was a decision I made after joining the ALSA mailing lists for a short time. IIRC, they had a Linux tarball linked somewhere off of their web page. I believe that Trident wrote their own ALSA drivers and released them under the GPL. Unfortunately, I cannot seem to find any audio products on www.tridentmicro.com, and www.hoontech.com doesn't seem to be responsive at the moment. - Bob ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: mail archives (was: Another ACPI anecdote, plus footnotes)
Bill McGonigle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Jan 24, 2005, at 12:48, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
>
>> Some folks on this list are *very* concerned with their email
>> addresses appearing on a web-accessible archive (they don't want to
>> give anything to the spammers). I share this concern, although I
>> think that there are folks on this list who are more adamant about
>> this than I am. I am more interested in making the collective wisdom
>> of this list available for others to gain from. Still, any mail
>> archive should have an email-address obfuscating feature, in order to
>> satisfy this (reasonable) request.
>
> This appears to be the main stumbling block. Mailman has an e-mail
> address obfuscation feature but it's very sad ('user at domain'). If
> I were writing a harvester I think I'd throw in the 1-line regex to
> fix these so it's not really a worthwhile countermeasure. I'm looking
> at what it would take to have Mailman just remove the e-mail address
> (display only the 'real name') or only show the user-part if there's
> no 'real name' provided so the offer is DOA unless I get that fixed.
I wrote a program that did most of this and posted this to the list a
while ago. Unfortunately, I don't have my personal archive with me
right now. Anybody? Otherwise I'll try to retreive this tonight.
[snip]
> The trouble with the password-protected archives is that they don't
> add to the general knowledge-base of the 'net. There's alot of great
> content from lots of smart folks here and it's a shame not to share it.
You and I agree 100% here.
[snip]
Regards,
--kevin
--
GnuPG ID: B280F24E And the madness of the crowd
alumni.unh.edu!kdc Is an epileptic fit
-- Tom Waits
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: mail archives (was: Another ACPI anecdote, plus footnotes)
> I'm curious - is there anyone here who expects total privacy with the > address they use to post here? If I were a spammer I'd subscribe to Hahahaha. :-( I wish I had a nickel for everytime the email privacy/mail archive/etc issue was rehashed & beaten to death. You could look in the archives for the history. Seriously, if you can remove all email addresses from the archive, I'd bet you'd solve 90% of the problems people have with creating an archive. The other 10% will beat the topic to death with (a few) real and (many many many ) hypothetical situations until you give up in frustration. A way around this might be a poll that put the archive idea to a vote, then go with the majority. Then put that in the charter so we can end these debates by pointing at the charter. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: mail archives (was: Another ACPI anecdote, plus footnotes)
On Jan 24, 2005, at 12:48, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
Some folks on this list are *very* concerned with their email
addresses appearing on a web-accessible archive (they don't want to
give anything to the spammers). I share this concern, although I
think that there are folks on this list who are more adamant about
this than I am. I am more interested in making the collective wisdom
of this list available for others to gain from. Still, any mail
archive should have an email-address obfuscating feature, in order to
satisfy this (reasonable) request.
This appears to be the main stumbling block. Mailman has an e-mail
address obfuscation feature but it's very sad ('user at domain'). If I
were writing a harvester I think I'd throw in the 1-line regex to fix
these so it's not really a worthwhile countermeasure. I'm looking at
what it would take to have Mailman just remove the e-mail address
(display only the 'real name') or only show the user-part if there's no
'real name' provided so the offer is DOA unless I get that fixed.
Removing X-No-Archive messages should be a 10-line formail/procmail
script, but if anyone has one done please send it along.
The trouble with the password-protected archives is that they don't add
to the general knowledge-base of the 'net. There's alot of great
content from lots of smart folks here and it's a shame not to share it.
I'm curious - is there anyone here who expects total privacy with the
address they use to post here? If I were a spammer I'd subscribe to
every list I could find via mailman,et.al. interfaces; we don't
validate lurkers here, right? I'm not arguing for showing the
addresses in the archive at all - just asking if there's a witness
protection program expectation here, that is if having your 'real name'
but not your e-mail address exposed to the Internet would cause a
problem. I'm ignoring the mail-archive.com archive for the sake of the
academic question.
-Bill
-
Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440
BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606
http://www.bfccomputing.com/Text: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
AIM: wpmcgonigleSkype: bill_mcgonigle
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: mail archives
Bruce Dawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hmmm. Those archives should be available at: > > http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/ These appear to be password protected, preventing non-subscribers from accessing them. Can search engines see these? I do like these archives; however I didn't know about them until around 30 seconds ago. The archives were removed with some fanfare (or, more precisely, not enough fanfare) a while ago; I don't recall anybody announcing that they were back. Thanks, --kevin -- GnuPG ID: B280F24E And the madness of the crowd alumni.unh.edu!kdc Is an epileptic fit -- Tom Waits ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Speakeasy as a DSL provider
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Drew Van Zandt wrote: > Yes; click on slashdot broadband (under services on left), you can get > an 8-ip deal. You can also probably get the same deal direct, > excluding the OSDL special stuff (that you'd eventually have to pay > for...6 months OSDL free, IIRC). Ah. Thing is,. I'm already a Speakeasy customer, have been for more than a year, and I have two static IPAs and am paying a helluva lot more than that. :-/ - -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp!" -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQCVAwUBQfVBJ5rNPMCpn3XdAQHPxQP/f9GxRiwFHdUer3WWugHqoqTzqrK/h+vf MY3lgX8FBsCc//jrAgtteYBikSv9K34FOl/F694isSowUy5d8ZiL7vBgPXAoKyID VxwFbWNTNQw2T5AZcGH4AoOsJhiSooI8UDLB5FlSftLoMI5vTuB53bJNh9W5KU7+ lOl3ahd/YBI= =E49w -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: mail archives
Hmmm. Those archives should be available at: http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/ --Bruce Bill McGonigle wrote: On Jan 23, 2005, at 22:30, Kevin D. Clark wrote: One thing that this highlights, to me, is that the archives to this mailing list still aren't available online. http://www.mail-archive.com/gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org/msg08582.html - Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Text: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: wpmcgonigleSkype: bill_mcgonigle ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Mailman setup
On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 12:39 -0500, Neil Joseph Schelly wrote: > What you want is for the mailman_director to be listed before the > system_aliases director, so that it will take charge of handling mailman > messages (and pass them through the mailman_transport) rather than the > system_aliases director. If the system_aliases director sees that message > first, it will just use the address_pipe transport, because: > >mailman: "|/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman post mailman" > is just an address pipe as far as it is concerned. Dead on - you were exactly right. Many thanks. (Thanks to Mark as well, for pointing at the README.EXIM though I never found the README.Debian) -- Cole Tuininga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: mail archives (was: Another ACPI anecdote, plus footnotes)
Bill McGonigle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I could mirror the list on my server, I already have mailman setup for > DLSLUG and sufficient free disk space. Does anybody have historical > mbox files? Somebody probably has these. I don't have a complete archive, but I've got *some*. Some folks on this list are *very* concerned with their email addresses appearing on a web-accessible archive (they don't want to give anything to the spammers). I share this concern, although I think that there are folks on this list who are more adamant about this than I am. I am more interested in making the collective wisdom of this list available for others to gain from. Still, any mail archive should have an email-address obfuscating feature, in order to satisfy this (reasonable) request. IIRC, there are also a few people on this list who may have posted messages with the X-No-Archive flag set. Any mail-archive should respect these people's wishes. Regards, --kevin -- GnuPG ID: B280F24E And the madness of the crowd alumni.unh.edu!kdc Is an epileptic fit -- Tom Waits ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Mailman setup
On Monday 24 January 2005 09:38 am, Cole Tuininga wrote: > Whenever the exim -q runs from cron, I get something like the following: > > 2005-01-24 08:53:01 1Cs7ew-0005Tf-00 Neither the system_aliases director > nor the address_pipe transport set a uid for local delivery of > > |/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman post mailman > > (Directors section) > mailman_director: > driver = smartuser > require_files = MAILMAN_HOME/lists/$local_part/config.pck > suffix_optional > suffix = -bounces : -bounces+* : \ > -confirm+* : -join : -leave : \ > -owner : -request : -admin > transport = mailman_transport > I have one suggestion to look for. The order of Directors matters. From the sound of that error, it looks as though the email is going through the address_pipe transport (for which no uid/gid is specified) rather than the mailman_transport. That probably means that a director above the mailman_director is taking control of the email. Perhaps the system_aliases director, since you put all those mailman addresses in the system aliases file. What you want is for the mailman_director to be listed before the system_aliases director, so that it will take charge of handling mailman messages (and pass them through the mailman_transport) rather than the system_aliases director. If the system_aliases director sees that message first, it will just use the address_pipe transport, because: >mailman: "|/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman post mailman" is just an address pipe as far as it is concerned. HTH, -N ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: mail archives (was: Another ACPI anecdote, plus footnotes)
If anyone wants to suggest an archiver/web frontend, I can set it up on my server; I can afford to store at least a few hundred meg of archives, probably even a gig. --DTVZ Note: As anyone I've replied to has probably noticed, I usually send the email intended for the list to an individual before I realize what I've done, and then forward it to the list as I originally intended. On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 12:03:08 -0500, Kevin D. Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Bill McGonigle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Jan 23, 2005, at 22:30, Kevin D. Clark wrote: > > > >> One thing that this highlights, to me, is that the archives to this > >> mailing list still aren't available online. > > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org/msg08582.html > > The archives from mail-archive.com are regularly purged, and in fact > only go back to 196 days at this instant. > > Regards, > > --kevin > -- > GnuPG ID: B280F24E And the madness of the crowd > alumni.unh.edu!kdc Is an epileptic fit >-- Tom Waits > ___ > gnhlug-discuss mailing list > gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org > http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss > ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
IBM Gives FOSS Free Access to 500 Patents - Rethinks IP Management
If you've been as busy as I've been lately, you might not have heard that IBM is proving Linus' quote: "Linux is inevitable". With a dramatic shift in their 'Intellectual Property' Management, IBM is standing behind free software more than ever. http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050110235654673 -- Greg Rundlett www.rundlett.com www.freephile.com randomly selected fortune: Let us treat men and women well; Treat them as if they were real; Perhaps they are. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: mail archives (was: Another ACPI anecdote, plus footnotes)
On Jan 24, 2005, at 12:03, Kevin D. Clark wrote: The archives from mail-archive.com are regularly purged, and in fact only go back to 196 days at this instant. Ah, bugger. I could mirror the list on my server, I already have mailman setup for DLSLUG and sufficient free disk space. Does anybody have historical mbox files? -Bill - Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Text: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: wpmcgonigleSkype: bill_mcgonigle ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: mail archives (was: Another ACPI anecdote, plus footnotes)
Bill McGonigle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Jan 23, 2005, at 22:30, Kevin D. Clark wrote: > >> One thing that this highlights, to me, is that the archives to this >> mailing list still aren't available online. > > http://www.mail-archive.com/gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org/msg08582.html The archives from mail-archive.com are regularly purged, and in fact only go back to 196 days at this instant. Regards, --kevin -- GnuPG ID: B280F24E And the madness of the crowd alumni.unh.edu!kdc Is an epileptic fit -- Tom Waits ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Mailman setup
On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 09:38:35AM -0500, Cole Tuininga wrote: > Whenever the exim -q runs from cron, I get something like the following: > > 2005-01-24 08:53:01 1Cs7ew-0005Tf-00 Neither the system_aliases director > nor the address_pipe transport set a uid for local delivery of > |/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman post mailman Yea, ran into this two weeks ago when setting it up on my box. Don't use /etc/aliases, and be sure to read the README.Debian and README.EXIM documentation that comes with Mailman. I'm using sarge, so there might be a few changes (I'm using Exim 4), but the docs are good for exim3 and 4. -Mark signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: mail archives (was: Another ACPI anecdote, plus footnotes)
On Jan 23, 2005, at 22:30, Kevin D. Clark wrote: One thing that this highlights, to me, is that the archives to this mailing list still aren't available online. http://www.mail-archive.com/gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org/msg08582.html - Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Text: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: wpmcgonigleSkype: bill_mcgonigle ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Mailman setup
Hi all - I'm setting up Mailman for the first time and have run into one
problem that even the great god "Google" can't seem to help me with. I
thought perhaps y'all could. 8)
Here's what I have: A debian (woody) box running exim 3.35. I hand
compiled python2.3 for it, and downloaded the latest stable Mailman
(2.1.5 I believe).
I followed the procedure for setting everything up, and so far as I can
tell, everything works.
However, there's one problem.
Whenever the exim -q runs from cron, I get something like the following:
2005-01-24 08:53:01 1Cs7ew-0005Tf-00 Neither the system_aliases director
nor the address_pipe transport set a uid for local delivery of
|/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman post mailman
I've got the following bits in my exim.conf (as directed by the setup)
(Main config section)
MAILMAN_HOME=/usr/local/mailman
MAILMAN_WRAP=MAILMAN_HOME/mail/mailman
MAILMAN_USER=mailman
MAILMAN_GROUP=mailman
(Transport section)
mailman_transport:
driver = pipe
command = MAILMAN_WRAP \
'${if def:local_part_suffix \
{${sg{$local_part_suffix}{-(\\w+)(\\+.*)?}{\$1}}} \
{post}}' \
$local_part
current_directory = MAILMAN_HOME
home_directory = MAILMAN_HOME
user = MAILMAN_USER
group = MAILMAN_GROUP
(Directors section)
mailman_director:
driver = smartuser
require_files = MAILMAN_HOME/lists/$local_part/config.pck
suffix_optional
suffix = -bounces : -bounces+* : \
-confirm+* : -join : -leave : \
-owner : -request : -admin
transport = mailman_transport
And finally, in my /etc/aliases (and yes, I did run "newaliases") I
have:
## mailman mailing list
mailman: "|/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman post mailman"
mailman-admin:"|/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman admin mailman"
mailman-bounces: "|/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman bounces mailman"
mailman-confirm: "|/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman confirm mailman"
mailman-join: "|/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman join mailman"
mailman-leave:"|/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman leave mailman"
mailman-owner:"|/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman owner mailman"
mailman-request: "|/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman request mailman"
mailman-subscribe:"|/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman subscribe
mailman"
mailman-unsubscribe: "|/usr/local/mailman/mail/mailman unsubscribe
mailman"
Anybody have thoughts/hints/suggestions? Many thanks in advance...
--
Cole Tuininga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Can only the 100Mbs part of a 10/100Mbs router fail?
Larry Cook wrote: Does anyone have a spare DSL modem they'd be willing to lend me for a few weeks that might work with GSInet's DSL service? I had two offers of loaners. One had been used with GSInet, so I've borrowed that one and it appears to work. Thanks, Larry ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
