22.214.171.124/6 reachability testing
warren at kumari.net
Wed May 2 20:27:04 UTC 2007
On May 2, 2007, at 4:01 PM, <andrew2 at one.net> <andrew2 at one.net> wrote:
> Warren Kumari wrote:
>> On May 2, 2007, at 2:58 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
>>> --- ronald.dasilva at twcable.com wrote:
>>> On 5/1/07 7:19 PM, "Scott Weeks" <surfer at mauigateway.com> wrote:
>>>>> Randy's MUA automatically deletes email sent directly to him...
>>>> Probably because you have a 12+ line .sig full of lawyer-speak.
>>> Both practices arguably ingenious or idiotic...
>>> Doesn't matter. He doesn't want to see the .sig and it's his email
>>> system. Others do the same.
>>> I gotta admit it's a really big .sig that's utterly useless. It
>>> *IS* being disseminated, distributed and copied and on a global
>>> basis. It's "unlawful" in what country? No one's going to delete
>>> all copies. Blah, blah, blah...
>> I don't think that Ron is choosing to put this .sig in his mail, some
>> ugly corporate mail gateway is probably appending it for him. While
>> he could spend a huge amount of time trying to explain to someone at
>> Time Warner that it is a stupid thing to do, I sure he has better
>> things to do...
> I don't see anywhere in the NANOG charter that says we have to use our
> corporate email addresses in correspondence with list. From what
> I've seen,
> most of us don't. I agree 100% that trying to get $corporation to
> the useless and annoying .sig's is like tilting at windmills. But
> for the
> sanity and comfort of other list users, would it be too much to ask
> people with annoying tacked-on .sig's use a personal mail account when
> posting to the list? I hear Google offers nice email accounts for a
> reasonable price.
Yup, you are 100% correct -- I meant (but forgot) to mention that,
other than when officially representing a company on a list, I always
post from a personal address, regardless of whether or not
$current_employer is doing silly .sigs or not.
I have already gotten a bunch of private mails pointing this fact out
(and one (spam) reply trying to sell me some sort of Chinese
pharmaceuticals :-( ) which is why I am replying publicly...
The plural of anecdote is not evidence.
-- Bill Lockyer, California Attorney General
More information about the NANOG