Yeah, you can throw out whatever acronym you want, but you can still SORT by date and you can no longer SEARCH by date, which is the reverse of what you posted earlier.
You are wrong. You are not on the new Google Groups page. There is sort by date, but not search by date. You want to look at groups-beta.google.com, not groups.google.com.
/etc/rcn.x directories where startup scripts are stored based on the runlevel "n". Simply remove the symbolic link, or rename the start up and kill scripts to lowercase S & K's.
OR
If you are using the GUI, there is a services screen that works just like your friendly Windows utility.
So I can distribute Windows XP CDs to whoever I want provided I don't give them a CD key? (They won't be able to use it then, right?!) I mean, I know they won't go download a key off of the Internet or anything. Somehow, though, I think I'd find myself in handcuffs.
SPF is all nice and such, but it won't help stop spam at all. All it will do is encourage spammers to use other forged domains that don't have SPF records (which is most of them.)
Adoption of SPF or other technologies (domain keys for example) needs to be near 100% to be useful in reducing spam.
I disagree. Each time a domain implements SPF, the "forgeable" domain list goes down. You are correct in that it will force spammers to use other forged domains, but it will also start highlighting domains that aren't secure. This act of highlighting will eventually catch up to the domain owners, and hopefully they'll implement SPF themselves.
I get a bunch of e-mail "from" AOL, Cox, etc... If the big players implement this, and I in turn start validating those e-mails, my list of spam will go down. Other e-mails that I get from smaller domains that I've never heard from before get deleted anyway because I know that I should not be receiving mail from them in the first place. Which means that it's in the spammer's interest to use larger, well-known domain names because those said domains are "trusted" by the general public.
I second this motion. Cox even started blocking outbound port 25 traffic, so this is the only way my servers can send mail to the outside world. Works great.
Postfix can be setup similarly in the postfix/transport file:
My pager would know. Why the need for a personal cell phone? Why not get the company to pay for a company cell phone that you carry around. Then leave your personal one at home, in your desk, in your coat, whatever...
I don't understand the problem. Pagers work great for text messaging.
Maybe you found the URL after the 30th page, of which 29.5 pages were all spam/pr0n/etc... So, you thought you'd post quality feedback to the team at Google.
You simply wait for a court order. That's how things work. Don't hand anything over without a court order. Simple.
If they don't have a contract with you stating that their e-mails on your system are their property, then you don't have to give them anything -- unless some court feels you need to.
How, then, would you propose that we get to the http://groups.google.com site?
Not all hosts on the 'net are www. Hell, many major sites don't even implement an A record (correctly) for their base domain. Ever go to someserver.com only to not get a response or an entirely different site as compared to www.someserver.com?
Maybe they should curtail the constant pinging (literally) I get from the latest MS worms. If they'd put a stop to those infected users, then my connection wouldn't be so constant...
...you'll no longer be able to use one cable for a computer and phone.
You shouldn't do this anyhow. I know that you *can*, but you shouldn't.
I don't think that is too kosher, especially when following the TIA/EIA 568 standards -- which is what you *should* be doing (Actually, homeowners should be following TIA/EIA 570 which refers to the 568 standard).
"DVR users skip at least two-thirds of commercials and the 'collective impact represents a threat to revenue and cash flow growth that cannot be offset..."
VCR users skip at least two-thirds of commercials and the 'collective impact represents a threat to revenue and cash flow growth that cannot be offset...
According to the NEC 2002 ed, section 800.53(A) states that, "Abandoned cables shall not be permitted to remain." Section 800.53(B)(1) states the same thing. So, abandoned cables in plenum & riser spaces MUST be removed according to the NEC. Your local jurisdiction might have something different to say, but that's what's written in the NEC.
Since that's cleared up now, I can move on to your question, "...what about when you have to do both."
Section 800.53(G) & Table 800.53 state that you can substitue cable type CMP (communications plenum) for type CMR (communications riser). You CANNOT substitute CMR for CMP though.
So, the layman's answer to your question is to run type CMP when you have both situations.
$799? A standard US price for Windows Server 2003, Standard Edition with 5 CALs is $999.
And then it's another $199 for every 5 CALs. And you'll need a CAL for every user/device that connects to your Windows Server 2003 box.
So, yeah, eventually the RHEL licensing cost would be more than what it cost for Windows Server 2003, but before that happens Windows Server 2003 will be unsupported perhaps. Windows Server 2003 is VERY expensive.
Slashdot Mirror
Will people quit modding the parent up? +4?
He's wrong, and not informative at all.
Yeah, you can throw out whatever acronym you want, but you can still SORT by date and you can no longer SEARCH by date, which is the reverse of what you posted earlier.
You are wrong. You are not on the new Google Groups page. There is sort by date, but not search by date. You want to look at groups-beta.google.com, not groups.google.com.
Sort by date is not search by date. Have you even looked at the advanced search screen in the "new" Google Groups? There is no date range search.
This may be of interest to some: http://sec.noaa.gov/pmap/
Contains forecasts and historical data plots.
Phil
chkconfig
/etc/rcn.x directories where startup scripts are stored based on the runlevel "n". Simply remove the symbolic link, or rename the start up and kill scripts to lowercase S & K's.
OR
OR
If you are using the GUI, there is a services screen that works just like your friendly Windows utility.
Focal length is recorded in most high-end digital cameras... The Canon 10D I own does.
So I can distribute Windows XP CDs to whoever I want provided I don't give them a CD key? (They won't be able to use it then, right?!) I mean, I know they won't go download a key off of the Internet or anything. Somehow, though, I think I'd find myself in handcuffs.
Fair use... Whatever.
I disagree. Each time a domain implements SPF, the "forgeable" domain list goes down. You are correct in that it will force spammers to use other forged domains, but it will also start highlighting domains that aren't secure. This act of highlighting will eventually catch up to the domain owners, and hopefully they'll implement SPF themselves.
I get a bunch of e-mail "from" AOL, Cox, etc... If the big players implement this, and I in turn start validating those e-mails, my list of spam will go down. Other e-mails that I get from smaller domains that I've never heard from before get deleted anyway because I know that I should not be receiving mail from them in the first place. Which means that it's in the spammer's interest to use larger, well-known domain names because those said domains are "trusted" by the general public.
Phil
Cox blocks ALL outbound port 25 traffic unless it's going through their servers.
Boo!
Postfix can be setup similarly in the postfix/transport file:The null entries for my.domain are so that internal mail doesn't go to outbound-relay.isp.domain.
Phil
Just stop it already. These people should be put in jail for coming up with such ridiculous accusations.
My pager would know. Why the need for a personal cell phone? Why not get the company to pay for a company cell phone that you carry around. Then leave your personal one at home, in your desk, in your coat, whatever...
I don't understand the problem. Pagers work great for text messaging.
Phil
Maybe you found the URL after the 30th page, of which 29.5 pages were all spam/pr0n/etc... So, you thought you'd post quality feedback to the team at Google.
You simply wait for a court order. That's how things work. Don't hand anything over without a court order. Simple.
If they don't have a contract with you stating that their e-mails on your system are their property, then you don't have to give them anything -- unless some court feels you need to.
Phil
How, then, would you propose that we get to the http://groups.google.com site?
Not all hosts on the 'net are www. Hell, many major sites don't even implement an A record (correctly) for their base domain. Ever go to someserver.com only to not get a response or an entirely different site as compared to www.someserver.com?
We have a long way to go in the DNS world.
Phil
Maybe they should curtail the constant pinging (literally) I get from the latest MS worms. If they'd put a stop to those infected users, then my connection wouldn't be so constant...
Phil
I don't think that is too kosher, especially when following the TIA/EIA 568 standards -- which is what you *should* be doing (Actually, homeowners should be following TIA/EIA 570 which refers to the 568 standard).
Phil
Haven't we been here before?
Phil
FYI - Riser is lower than plenum. So, you'd have to use plenum wherever riser is called for in the mentioned situation.
According to the NEC 2002 ed, section 800.53(A) states that, "Abandoned cables shall not be permitted to remain." Section 800.53(B)(1) states the same thing. So, abandoned cables in plenum & riser spaces MUST be removed according to the NEC. Your local jurisdiction might have something different to say, but that's what's written in the NEC.
Since that's cleared up now, I can move on to your question, "...what about when you have to do both."
Section 800.53(G) & Table 800.53 state that you can substitue cable type CMP (communications plenum) for type CMR (communications riser). You CANNOT substitute CMR for CMP though.
So, the layman's answer to your question is to run type CMP when you have both situations.
Phil
$799? A standard US price for Windows Server 2003, Standard Edition with 5 CALs is $999.
And then it's another $199 for every 5 CALs. And you'll need a CAL for every user/device that connects to your Windows Server 2003 box.
So, yeah, eventually the RHEL licensing cost would be more than what it cost for Windows Server 2003, but before that happens Windows Server 2003 will be unsupported perhaps. Windows Server 2003 is VERY expensive.
Phil
Dang. Who moved my cheese?
This is still supported by Red Hat. Embrace the change and quit acting like Hem & Haw.
Phil
Since your price was incorrect, you could always pay $27.95 @ Bookpool.com.
Phil