[103201] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: I'm going to stay on the NANOG list anyway
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Al Iverson)
Fri Mar 21 21:12:59 2008
From: Al Iverson <aiversonlists@spamresource.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:12:01 -0500
To: ?NANOG? Operators Group 3F_Operators_Group_
<nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Thanks for letting us know that we should update our kill files.
Al
-----Original Message-----
From: James R. Cutler <james.cutler@consultant.com>
Sent: March 21, 2008 4:39 PM
To: ?NANOG? Operators Group 3F_Operators_Group_ <nanog@merit.edu>
Subject: I'm going to stay on the NANOG list anyway
Whoops! I'm still coming to grips with multihoming. According to =0A=
your thinking, my many years on the NANOG mailing list were wrong and =0A=
you tell me I should leave.=0A=
=0A=
I don't think I can allow you to do that, Andrew.=0A=
=0A=
Paul Vixie, Dillon, Bush, and others have given many examples of =0A=
appropriate and concise direction giving to newby questioners. Follow =0A=
their lead, please.=0A=
=0A=
Cutler=0A=
=0A=
On Mar 21, 2008, at 5:15 PM, <andrew2@one.net> wrote:=0A=
=0A=
> Scott McGrath wrote:=0A=
>> If we do not help the newbies how will they ever become clued. I =0A=
>> can=0A=
>> certainly remember when I did not know a bit from a byte.=0A=
>=0A=
> I agree, but I question if NANOG is the appropriate medium for such =0A=
> help. I=0A=
> tend to (maybe mistakenly) assume a working knowledge of basic =0A=
> multihoming=0A=
> concepts is essentially a prerequisite for active participation on =0A=
> the NANOG=0A=
> mailing list.=0A=
=0A=
