Changes in the "changed" field
- Previous message (by thread): Changes in the "changed" field
- Next message (by thread): Changes in the "changed" field
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Daniel Karrenberg
Daniel.Karrenberg at ripe.net
Thu Jun 25 11:28:15 CEST 1998
> Michael van Elst <mlelstv at xlink.net> writes: > > do we need someone who stops the time when the first anti-spam tool > has deciphered the new option ? The difference is that then it is deliberate and not accidental. What we wnat to do is prevent accidental and unwanted use of e-mail addresses which are very often not connected to the database object anyways. I get dozens of e-mails a day because I used to change database objects more than 7 years ago. > can we start a discussion to hide the notify: fields as well ? Here > this address gets an order of magnitude more anti-spam mail than any > entry found in a changed: line. I consider this well-directed e-mail as the notify attribute, as the mnt-notify, should be maintained current and point to a mailbox maintaining the database object and the resource associated with it. It is then a matter of local policy whether you answer this kind of mail or you do not. > Sorry, if this sounds sarcastic. I'm just trying to prevent people > from wasting time that could be better spent in the forthcoming > reimplementation of the database. We looked at this and it is not a big deal to implement. Daniel
- Previous message (by thread): Changes in the "changed" field
- Next message (by thread): Changes in the "changed" field
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]