On May 17, 2011, at 9:36 PM, "Doran L. Barton" wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 17, 2011 04:22:25 PM Ryan Simpkins wrote:
>> Like PHP.
>>
>> zin!
>
> $ryan++;
>
There. I fixed that for you ;)
-- justin
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/ma
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 18:06, Lars Rasmussen wrote:
> Greetings PLUG!
>
snip
>
> Any recommendations on where to locally purchase Smurf Tube? Is that what
> electricians actually call this?
> It doesn't have to be blue. I read in one post that orange is typically
> used for low voltage, for exa
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 09:23:40PM -0600, Michael Torrie wrote:
> So I have a fairly strange network setup going here, mainly out of
> necessity. I'll diagram it out below, with "WAP" meaning wireless
> access device, and "Bridge" meaning a linksys router configure to be a
> wireless client that b
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Tod Hansmann wrote:
> Has anyone used vi.net for hosting or colocation? I'm debating using
> them for colocating my personal server (just a 1U thing) and they've got
> a good deal, but if they're going to be down every month or something,
> I'd rather avoid them a
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Lonnie Olson wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Tod Hansmann
> wrote:
> > Has anyone used vi.net for hosting or colocation? I'm debating using
> > them for colocating my personal server (just a 1U thing) and they've got
> > a good deal, but if they're go
Are all your devices on the same subnet?
is your linksys router acting as a bridge only?, is it doing any routing at
all? by bridging you mean layer 2 bridging only, right? do you have proxy
arp turned on anywhere? you sure there is only one DHCP server?
Tomas
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:33 AM,
On 05/18/2011 10:33 AM, Andrew McNabb wrote:
>> WAP1 <--- Bridge1 <=== WAP2 <--- Bridge2 === Device
>> \==device
>> +==device
>
> I presume that the WAPs are configured as bridges, too, right?
No, the WAPs are normal access points; the bridges connect a
On 05/18/2011 01:45 PM, MT Morales wrote:
> Are all your devices on the same subnet?
> is your linksys router acting as a bridge only?, is it doing any routing at
> all? by bridging you mean layer 2 bridging only, right? do you have proxy
> arp turned on anywhere? you sure there is only one DHCP s
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 02:13:34PM -0600, Michael Torrie wrote:
> On 05/18/2011 10:33 AM, Andrew McNabb wrote:
> >> WAP1 <--- Bridge1 <=== WAP2 <--- Bridge2 === Device
> >> \==device
> >> +==device
> >
> > I presume that the WAPs are configured as bridge
ya I think that's a good point.
Also, if you are taking sniffer traces, you should be able to map all the
MAC addresses from the ping replies to actual physical hosts (since they are
all in the same subnet, right?) , and determine if a MAC is replying for
more than one IP address.
On Wed, May 18,
Since we've already had a discussion about the impending rapture, just
figured I'd let you all know the CDC has just released guidelines (for
real), for what to do in a Zombie Apocalypse. I figured I'd share.
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/05/18/cdc-warns-public-prepare-zombie-apocalypse/?test
Do you still have it cached in your browser? Perhaps you could put it on
github or a blogspot blog that capable of handling the traffic.
AJ ONeal
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 4:27 PM, S. Dale Morrey wrote:
> Since we've already had a discussion about the impending rapture, just
> figured I'd let you
On another note... why isn't the google "cache" cached?
AJ ONeal
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 5:01 PM, AJ ONeal wrote:
> Do you still have it cached in your browser? Perhaps you could put it on
> github or a blogspot blog that capable of handling the traffic.
>
> AJ ONeal
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 18, 20
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 6:05 PM, AJ ONeal wrote:
> On another note... why isn't the google "cache" cached?
>
> AJ ONeal
robots.txt of course. :p
there's always archive.org
Scott.
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear th
ah, found a link:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:CO9vfWcAsZ4J:blogs.cdc.gov/publichealthmatters/2011/05/preparedness-101-zombie-apocalypse/+http://blogs.cdc.gov/publichealthmatters/2011/05/preparedness-101-zombie-apocalypse/&hl=en&gl=us&strip=1
AJ ONeal
On Wed, May 18, 2011
isn't anyone else worried there will be a lot of well-prepared zombies
wandering the streets? they could last for weeks, months, years!
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Brad Midgley wrote:
> isn't anyone else worried there will be a lot of well-prepared zombies
> wandering the streets? they could last for weeks, months, years!
My plans involve converting them to bio-diesel, or possibly heat my
house with them, should be a rich sou
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 19:16, Brad Midgley wrote:
> isn't anyone else worried there will be a lot of well-prepared zombies
> wandering the streets? they could last for weeks, months, years!
According to Revelations 9:5-6 they will only last 5 months ...
--
Alan Young
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org,
On 05/18/2011 07:29 PM, Alan Young wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 19:16, Brad Midgley wrote:
>> isn't anyone else worried there will be a lot of well-prepared zombies
>> wandering the streets? they could last for weeks, months, years!
> According to Revelations 9:5-6 they will only last 5 months
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Henry Paul wrote:
> On 05/18/2011 07:29 PM, Alan Young wrote:
>> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 19:16, Brad Midgley wrote:
>>> isn't anyone else worried there will be a lot of well-prepared zombies
>>> wandering the streets? they could last for weeks, months, years!
>> A
On 05/18/2011 08:12 PM, Nicholas Leippe wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Henry Paul wrote:
>> On 05/18/2011 07:29 PM, Alan Young wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 19:16, Brad Midgleywrote:
isn't anyone else worried there will be a lot of well-prepared zombies
wandering the
On 05/18/2011 02:32 PM, Andrew McNabb wrote:
> If the WAPs aren't bridging, then they must be trying to route, right?
> It seems to me that they would have to be pure bridges for the system to
> work.
No, for all intents and purposes every wireless router (whether bridge
or WAP) except for the fir
On 05/18/2011 09:56 PM, Michael Torrie wrote:
> On 05/18/2011 02:32 PM, Andrew McNabb wrote:
>> If the WAPs aren't bridging, then they must be trying to route, right?
>> It seems to me that they would have to be pure bridges for the system to
>> work.
>
> No, for all intents and purposes every wir
On 05/18/2011 09:57 PM, Michael Torrie wrote:
> On 05/18/2011 09:56 PM, Michael Torrie wrote:
>> On 05/18/2011 02:32 PM, Andrew McNabb wrote:
>>> If the WAPs aren't bridging, then they must be trying to route, right?
>>> It seems to me that they would have to be pure bridges for the system to
>>> w
On 05/18/2011 03:09 PM, MT Morales wrote:
> ya I think that's a good point.
> Also, if you are taking sniffer traces, you should be able to map all the
> MAC addresses from the ping replies to actual physical hosts (since they are
> all in the same subnet, right?) , and determine if a MAC is replyi
25 matches
Mail list logo
