he.net down/slow?

Dave Martin darkmoon at vt.edu
Fri Jan 8 13:24:51 UTC 2010

On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 06:13:16PM -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:51:41 CST, Brian Johnson said:
> > > On 7 Jan 2010, at 18:18, William Pitcock wrote:
> > > > ...why would you have that on a mailing list post?
> > > because the mail server that adds it is too dumb to differentiate
> > > between list and direct mail?
> > Bingo! ;)
> That sort of gratuitous "add it to everything because our software is too
> stupid to sort it out" is *this* close to what the legal eagles call
> "overwarning".  Just sayin'.
> (Basically, your site and everybody else's site sticks it on everything,
> all the recipients just ignore it the same way we almost always ignore
> Received: headers because they're on every message and very rarely have
> any useful content - with the end result that if you stick it on a message
> that *matters*, it will still get ignored....)
> Oh, and is your company ready to indemnify my employer for the costs of
> "destroy all copies of the original message" sufficiently thoroughly to
> prevent recovery by a competent forensics expert? This may include, but
> not be limited to, the main mail store for 70,000 people, backup tapes,
> and other mail systems where the data may have been logically deleted but
> as yet not overwritten.  Just sayin'. ;)

Valdis:  150,000.  Not 70,000.  Spread across four machines and eleven
partitions and 5 flash partions.  Not mentioning the pool of a/v
scanners, the quarantine servers, the auth server, the five webmail
machines, or the OMR.


Nobody believed that I could build a space station here.  So I built it anyway.
It sank into the vortex.  So I built another one.  It sank into the vortex.  
The third station burned down, fell over then sank into the vortex.  The fourth
station just vanished.  And the fifth station, THAT stayed!

More information about the NANOG mailing list