On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 09:54:14PM -0700, Henry Linneweh wrote:
>
> And just when things looked dismal this had to happen
> to make it more so
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1898-2004Jun24.html?referrer=email
http://bugmenot.com/view.php?url=washingtonpost.com
-Setzer
On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 10:41:53AM -0800, John Todd wrote:
[...]
> >> Realweasel is a great idea if you can afford it -- but the PCI version
> >> lists for $350, which is as expensive as some used 1U servers on EBay.
> >
> >Is there an effective alternative? All the intel "servers" these days
> >
On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 09:07:31AM -0500, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Vixie writes:
>
> >> I agree, lack of interactive access to a system prior to a functional OS
> >> being loaded always seemed like a potential problem area to me,
> >> particularly for
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 12:21:54PM -1000, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> > No true in many cases. All I have to prove is it's not the network and
> > then I hand it off to the windows/*nix/ sysadmins. To prove
> > it's not the network, I don't need to know the end systems in any sort of
> > detail.
>
>
