On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Jay Hennigan wrote:
> On 7/2/10 8:29 PM, Simon Lyall wrote:
>
> > Unless people serious intended for the organisation to have regular [1]
> > meetings outside of North America (which I doubt) then it should retain
> > the current general name and focus.
> >
> > [1
y'all,
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 11:27:51AM -0400, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Todd Underwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If you want to continue to challenge me to come up with the v6
> content, I'll be happy to. Make it official.
y'all
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 09:43:54AM -0400, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 7:32 AM, Todd Underwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > randy,
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 12:12:24PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
> > > [ moved to future
e. we also really like presentations, though, so if
someone thinks there's some good content on what is going on in
ipv6-land that is relevant to operators of Internet-connected
networks, we'd be happy to review it and give it a platform if we find
it relevant.
t.
--
__
agree with the content.
t.
--
_____
todd underwood +1 603 643 9300 x101
renesys corporationgeneral manager babbledog
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
questions about it?
thanks,
todd underwood
___
Nanog-futures mailing list
Nanog-futures@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
> >
> > It seems to be a cut and dried case of "mail bouncing". If mail
> > bounces, the address is "not good" and should be removed.
no. if mail *from* the list bounces, the address should be removed.
if you bounce all the mail from everyone else in the world, it's
unrelated.
> Not for the c
