Re: Verisign vs. ICANN

2004-06-17 Thread Chris Yarnell

> For that matter why don't they just name entire NANOG! I remember what a
> reaction there was on the list and 100% of those responding were purely
> negative of Verisign wildcards.

Hmm,

I remember a whole lot of really irrational and really unhelpful
replies.  Granted, there were some well thought out replies sprinkled in
there, but I dunno if I want to be grouped with all of the other posters.

:-)


Re: Travelling the backway to Google

2004-06-16 Thread Chris Yarnell

I'd suggest working with Google if you feel you need some sort of out of
band access to them rather than asking here.  I'm sure Google doesn't need
thousands of people picking weird random ways to access their clusters. :)

> Is anyone aware of a non-akamized way to access google? Considering
> we've had a few Akamai issues in the past couple months it could proove
> handy in the future to be able to access google through non-Akamai
> channels. I thought maybe the API access they provide may bypass it, but
> with a little ethereal work I discovered it simply hits the same
> addresses. Any ideas?


Re: How relable does the Internet need to be? (Was: Re: Converged Network Threat)

2004-02-25 Thread Chris Yarnell

> code problems from time to time, and the typical root server hicups.

Which hicups are those?


Re: [IP] VeriSign prepares to relaunch "Site Finder" -- calls technologists "biased"

2004-02-09 Thread Chris Yarnell

and this helps fix thed "biased technologists" image, how?

>  Again, the close knit community responds:

[ ... ]


Re: Upcoming change to SOA values in .com and .net zones

2004-01-07 Thread Chris Yarnell

> Hence there seems to be at least some impact on the community and that's
> before these changes are even implemented. :-)

The only impact is to our mailboxes wrt messages from people who do not
fully grok the (non)issue.


Re: NOAA warning for rf communications

2003-10-23 Thread Chris Yarnell

my office experienced 802.11b weirdness (sudden bouts of 0% signal for no
apparent reason) earlier this week. i'm fully expecting more tomorrow. :)

> There is a high likelihood that things like 802.11, licensed and
> unlicensed microwave links, and certainly satellite links will sustain
> interference over the next few days. I assume that everyone on the list
> is both aware, and prepared ;-)