|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: [Nanog-futures] Announce list: Re: Hughes Network
I'm subscribed to both now. ;-) The advantage to the NANOG subject header was obviously it was resilient to e-mail address changes for the list. A nice attribute given e-mails now come in from both [email protected] and [email protected] addresses. Anyhow, I assume there was compelling reason for the change. -J --- Jason J. W. Williams COO/CTO, DigiTar http://www.digitar.com E: [email protected] V: 208-343-8520 M: 208-863-0727 F: 208-322-8520 XMPP: [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: Sam Stickland [mailto:[email protected]x] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 7:59 AM To: Joe Abley Cc: nanog; nanog-futures Subject: Re: [Nanog-futures] Announce list: Re: Hughes Network Joe Abley wrote: > > On 22 May 2008, at 23:16, James R. Cutler wrote: > >> The announcement was made to nanog-announce, but not to nanog. I >> would expect that there are scads more readers of nanog than of nanog >> announce. > > When I was sending things to nanog-announce, it was the case that mail > to nanog-announce was sent to people who had specifically subscribed > to that list, plus anybody who hadn't but who was subscribed to nanog > (in other words, it was sent to the union of both lists). > > That might have changed since the transition to mailman. It seemed > like a useful approach, though. > Kinda makes you wonder what the purpose on the announce list is though. Are there actually people subscribed to nanog-annouce that aren't subscribed to nanog? Sam !SIG:4836ce2871591551116042!
|