[ipv6-wg at ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jarno Lähteenmäki
jarno.lahteenmaki at finnet.fi
Thu Sep 9 08:13:58 CEST 2004
I'm not considering the report as a spam but... The report would be more usefull if you send a summary on a monthly basis. Sending the report daily or even weekly is way too often... If needed you can provide daily snapshots somewhere else (a web page perhaps?). --> Jarno Lähteenmäki Jeroen Massar wrote: > On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 17:07, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > >>Since a storm seems to be rising about this >>and it threatens to leave the tea cup here >>is some perspective. > > > Which book is that from? > > <SNIP> > >>On 08.09 00:00, Daniel Roesen wrote: >> >>>On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 11:49:48AM +0200, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: >>> >>>>On 07.09 01:08, Daniel Roesen wrote: >>>> >>>>>DNS WEATHER REPORT for selected infrastructure zones >>>>>==================================================== >>>> >>>>Please stop spamming mailing lists. >>> >>>OK, you made me curious. Why do you (you are the first, all the other >>>feedback was overly positive) consider this "spamming"? >> >>Sending *unsolicited* automatic reports to *multiple* mailing lists >>is considered bad netiquette. > > > I really can't call it spam, there was nothing unsolicited inside it, > they where not autogenerated, did not contain any off-topic contents and > it did not advertise for anything. > > >>In your case even more so since >>similar and better defined reports are available on demand from >>more than one source. > > > Which sources may that be that report about nameservers? > (There is unfortunatly no IPv6-wg resource page and google can't > seem to find them for me either) > > Next to that, it is quite apparent that the operator(s) in question > are not really watching their own infrastructure, which is basically > their work, at all.... that gives one to wonder... > > >>It would have been more acceptable to say something like: >>"Hey, I have made this useful report. What do you think about it? >>If you are interested you can subscribe to regular reports here." > > > Indeed, where can I request to signup for this as I think it is very > useful, even more useful than the CIDR report, which doesn't change as > the people at the top are simply ignoring it anyways. Nameservers though > are technically important, if they are configured wrongly then they > don't work and they break stuff and especially at the level what was > being reported about I think it is a very important technical report. > > >>These days netiquette is violated so frequently that most people >>do not even care to point things out to violators; >>they just ignore messages from people who do not behave socially. >>Procmail is an easy tool. > > > Indeed, that is the way most people do it and they do it silently > without making it publicly noticeable that they have something, > whatever that may be 'against' some person/company or his/her/it's > beliefs. That is why I always use one single mail address for posting > my own personal beliefs, if you want to add it to the killfile have fun > doing so, responses coming back from persons who don't like you won't > be productive in any way thus it only saves a lot of useless mails. > > Greets, > Jeroen > > (Only took me <1 min to type this ;) >
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]