|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 162 responses total. |
mdw
|
|
response 88 of 162:
| 
Aug 22 09:19 UTC 1999 |
Newuser is anal-retentive, because it wants to be *sure* the account it
creates is going to work right. If you *really* want dots in your name;
you can use "chfn" to change your full name. Chfn will warn you that
this could cause problems with some mailers, but the assumption is, if
you can use chfn to put dots in, you can use chfn to take them back out.
Grex's mail program *should* quote your gecos full name if it has
reserved characters in it; and other mail programs *should* work right
with the quoted characters, but there *are* broken mail programs out
there; there is no guarantee everything will work right everywhere.
|
remmers
|
|
response 89 of 162:
|
Aug 22 12:29 UTC 1999 |
I understand the reasoning but think it's going a tad overboard in this
day and age. I've used a bunch of different mailers, and they all seem
to do the quoting correctly (as I've been able to observe because of the
"H." in my name...). Does anybody know of any specific mailers that are
broken in this regard?
|
mdw
|
|
response 90 of 162:
|
Aug 22 16:31 UTC 1999 |
., like @ and <, is special to mail - that's in RFC 822 and can't be
changed. On the other hand, ' and ! aren't mentioned in RFC 822,
but...! ! was used for bang addressing and is still regarded as magical
by various mailers. ' shouldn't be special, but I ran across once
mailer that got very confused by 's. There are a *lot* of mailers out
there, and I doubt even all the readers of this conference are at all a
representative sample of the mailers available. Actually, in reading
RFC 822, it's kind of vague about full names; but the examples given
definitely quote full name data that includes .'s. It seems hard to
believe such an obvious area would be so ill defined; but that's life
when it comes to name data.
So far as that goes, stuffing name information into a field originally
intended to hold mainframe account/printer routing information is a hack
in itself.
|
remmers
|
|
response 91 of 162:
|
Aug 22 18:31 UTC 1999 |
(My personal opinion is that RFC 822 erred in making "." a special
character, but Marcus is right - the specification is so firmly
entrenched that we're essentially stuck with it.)
|
drew
|
|
response 92 of 162:
|
Aug 22 19:56 UTC 1999 |
Generally, you can escape special characters (\.) if you really want them
somewhere.
|
richard
|
|
response 93 of 162:
|
Aug 25 21:41 UTC 1999 |
grex is noticeably slow today...seems like the old days
|
remmers
|
|
response 94 of 162:
|
Aug 25 23:28 UTC 1999 |
Feels sprightly to me right now...
|
steve
|
|
response 95 of 162:
|
Aug 26 22:48 UTC 1999 |
Richard, remember that you could be having network problems such that
packets dribble out to you at an agonizing rate, when Grex itself could
be fine. It's sometimes hard to tell which is slow, I know.
|
bdh1
|
|
response 96 of 162:
|
Aug 27 05:05 UTC 1999 |
depending on your OS you may be able to do a 'traceroute' to grex to see
where the problem actually is. Typically you cannot do this behind
firewalls or from and ISP that blocks ICMP packets. But if you can do a
full traceroute to grex you most typically will find that your
'agonizing rate' is at a NAP between two backbone providers (typically
MCI/ATT/Ameritech) and has nothing to do with grex. None of the
carriers feel it is their responsibility to provide high speed/high
capacity access to competitors and only provide minimal NAP as a
necessary 'courtesy'.
|
scg
|
|
response 97 of 162:
|
Aug 27 05:33 UTC 1999 |
Actually, IP backbones (the good ones anyway) do pay a lot of attention to
good peering with other backbones. Since customers aren't generally just
trying to connect to customers of the same backbone, backbones with bad
peering generally get lots of upset customers. That's not to say that peering
out on the Net is good, as a general rule, since there are various political
conflicts and the like that get in the way.
|
bdh1
|
|
response 98 of 162:
|
Aug 27 06:36 UTC 1999 |
MCI and Ameritech are currently in court over a NAP in chicagoland area
(high traffic, buy a T1 and get throughput like a modem). MCI/Worldcom
recently had a 'problem' upstream from a number of ISPs in a market it
was trying to move into and for almost two weeks 'stonewalled' -
meanwhile the local ISPs got to deal with pissed off customers.
MCI/Worldcom 'coincidently' has local media campaign to promote its ISP
products.
re#97: define a 'good' 'backbone' provider and name one that doesn't
play the game the same way the rest of them do.
|
jazz
|
|
response 99 of 162:
|
Aug 27 12:19 UTC 1999 |
The problem with NAPs has little or nothing to do with the intentions
of major backbone providers, but rather that the NAPs themselves are run by
third-party companies who often know very little of IP networking, and
sometimes it seems precious little of FDDI and ATM internetworking, either.
In order to work out a problem on a NAP, at least three companies have to be
called into the fray, and most companies simply attempt to shift the blame
onto one of the others. Adding to that the fact that only about half of a
percent of the people who use traceroute tools to report NAP-related problems
have a good concept of "return route" and how to isolate a one-way asymmetric
problem, and the slowness of NAP providers ... and well, there you have the
reason that backbone providers tend to use PICs (Private InterConnects).
It's kind of silly to say that no ISP wants to provide access to it's
neighbors; large ISPs do not want to provide peering to their neighbors (they
sell them transit instead, it has to do with the way that BGP allows one
network to use the other network's bandwidth for traffic) but that's not
strictly relevant. The ability to reach ones' competitors is often a key
factor in choosing a particular connection over another.
|
jazz
|
|
response 100 of 162:
|
Aug 27 15:18 UTC 1999 |
I should say large ISPs do not want to provide peering to their smaller
neighbors, not to their neighbors at all.
|
macho
|
|
response 101 of 162:
|
Aug 30 12:42 UTC 1999 |
hi !!my name is anand.anybody wanna be my friend?
|
headdoc
|
|
response 102 of 162:
|
Aug 31 23:15 UTC 1999 |
I was just in the middle of a long e-mail when all sorts of letter strings
appeared on my screen and my cursor froze. Nothing I did could get things
going again and I lost the whole darn correspondence. What causes that and
can it be rectified?
|
other
|
|
response 103 of 162:
|
Sep 1 00:07 UTC 1999 |
did someone pick up an extension phone on your modem line?
|
mcnally
|
|
response 104 of 162:
|
Sep 1 01:45 UTC 1999 |
re #102: were you dialled in directly or telnetting in? it should
*never* happen if you're telnetting in..
|
scg
|
|
response 105 of 162:
|
Sep 1 02:17 UTC 1999 |
Unless you're dialed into wherever you're telnetting from with a terminal..
|
mcnally
|
|
response 106 of 162:
|
Sep 1 04:20 UTC 1999 |
Unless you're dialed in using PPP or some other TCP-over-dialup protocol,
etc.. I was hoping not to open that can of worms by assuming that if she
was telnetted in that there was no non-error-correcting link in the chain..
|
headdoc
|
|
response 107 of 162:
|
Sep 3 21:58 UTC 1999 |
I dialed in from home. Also, we have a separate line for the computer, so
no, no one picked up the telephone extension. Any other ideas? Could it be
a break of some kind in the telephone line outside the house? Could it have
been something originating at the Grex terminal? Could it have been something
in the Pine works? I was e-mailing through pine.
Inquiring minds want to know.\
|
mooncat
|
|
response 108 of 162:
|
Sep 3 23:31 UTC 1999 |
Hmm, I wonder if it could have been cross-talk somewhere along the line.
Every once and awhile while working in one office on campus we would
get calls for a completely different office with a totally different
number- but because of interference on the line we got their calls.
So somewhere, if wire were slightly frayed and hit each other just
right you could have gotten some 'noise' through your line.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 109 of 162:
|
Sep 4 02:13 UTC 1999 |
You could have a poor connection in a modular plug; the telephone company
might have done something; an animal might have nibbled an elevated phone
wire; lightning?; wind could have rattled a bad external connection;
something might have happened at Grex (among which are all of the above
plus staff falling off their chairs.... :)
|
headdoc
|
|
response 110 of 162:
|
Sep 5 02:11 UTC 1999 |
If I had to guess, it would be the cross talk or frayed lines. No wind or
lightening at the time, Rane. A day like today. Now Grex staff members
falling off chairs. . .I am trying to envision. Everyone seems so stable.
(a psychologists pun.)
|
tpryan
|
|
response 111 of 162:
|
Sep 8 02:39 UTC 1999 |
Just had a phunny phone connect. Ring thru on the first line,
then after second line answered, a disconnect. A quick re-dial got
me in.
|
otaking
|
|
response 112 of 162:
|
Sep 8 11:13 UTC 1999 |
Yesterday, grex said that I had a bad participation file when I entered aora.
Now it says that I have 190 brandnew items. It's as if I never read anything
in this conference at all. Is there any way to fix that?
|
