Discussion:
SORBS still listing Telecom static IPs as dynamic...
(too old to reply)
Paul Adshead
2006-05-18 04:40:42 UTC
Permalink
It appears that SORBS are atill listing Telecom static IP ranges (-
which my address is in,) as dynamic ranges. Wasn't this in the process
of being fixed weeks/months ago? Does anyone have any ideas on how long
this is going to be until it's resolved?

The whole SORBS situation over the past months is becoming a total joke,
with mail admins I know turning off their use of SORBS - there is just
far far far too many false positives... :-(

Paul.


-----Original Message-----
From: System Administrator
Sent: Thursday, 18 May 2006 15:58
To: <customer>
Subject: Undeliverable:RE: <mail subject>

Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients.

Subject: RE: <mail subject>
Sent: 18/05/2006 15:58

The following recipient(s) could not be reached:

Robert Reid on 18/05/2006 15:58
You do not have permission to send to this recipient. For
assistance, contact your system administrator.
<mailserver.mycompany.co.nz #5.7.1 smtp;554 5.7.1 Rejected
210.55.xx.xxx is a dynamic IP (see:
http://www.au.sorbs.net/faq/dul.shtml for more information)>
Juha Saarinen
2006-05-18 04:46:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Adshead
It appears that SORBS are atill listing Telecom static IP ranges (-
which my address is in,) as dynamic ranges. Wasn't this in the process
of being fixed weeks/months ago? Does anyone have any ideas on how long
this is going to be until it's resolved?
The whole SORBS situation over the past months is becoming a total joke,
with mail admins I know turning off their use of SORBS - there is just
far far far too many false positives... :-(
Inspire Net IPs too... just got another SORBS induced bounce from a
Telecom's mail server.

Kind of funny that Telecom uses SORBS after the ORBS debacle though.
Someone should tell Alan Brown (I can't, because he uses SORBS too so
messages to him bounce).
--
Juha Saarinen
www.geekzone.co.nz/juha
www.computerworld.co.nz
Bruce Harding
2006-05-18 04:57:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juha Saarinen
Inspire Net IPs too... just got another SORBS induced bounce from a
Telecom's mail server.
We are slowly getting them to update their lists.
--
Bruce Harding

Inspire Net Ltd

Phone : 06 357 8559
Fax : 06 353 1154
Mobile : 021 519 024
Shane
2006-05-18 07:16:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juha Saarinen
Post by Paul Adshead
It appears that SORBS are atill listing Telecom static IP ranges (-
which my address is in,) as dynamic ranges. Wasn't this in the process
of being fixed weeks/months ago? Does anyone have any ideas on how long
this is going to be until it's resolved?
The whole SORBS situation over the past months is becoming a total joke,
with mail admins I know turning off their use of SORBS - there is just
far far far too many false positives... :-(
Inspire Net IPs too... just got another SORBS induced bounce from a
Telecom's mail server.
Kind of funny that Telecom uses SORBS after the ORBS debacle though.
Someone should tell Alan Brown (I can't, because he uses SORBS too so
messages to him bounce).
This is a me too post (Ihug static)
I discovered this when I went to post on NZLUG mailing list (Hint: NZLUG
admins or people with power thereof)
Im a newbie at this so what are my options?
Ive emailed SORBS and pointed out my rdns has the word static in it, and they
werent helpful _at all_, and Ive spoken to IHUG's residential helpdesk (It
was just a little over their heads), I emailed the SORBS induced bounces to
***@ihug.net.nz and ***@ihug.net.nz which got me the reassuring
automated responses, and nothing else.
Mark Foster
2006-05-18 07:28:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Shane
Post by Juha Saarinen
Post by Paul Adshead
It appears that SORBS are atill listing Telecom static IP ranges (-
which my address is in,) as dynamic ranges. Wasn't this in the process
of being fixed weeks/months ago? Does anyone have any ideas on how long
this is going to be until it's resolved?
The whole SORBS situation over the past months is becoming a total joke,
with mail admins I know turning off their use of SORBS - there is just
far far far too many false positives... :-(
Inspire Net IPs too... just got another SORBS induced bounce from a
Telecom's mail server.
Kind of funny that Telecom uses SORBS after the ORBS debacle though.
Someone should tell Alan Brown (I can't, because he uses SORBS too so
messages to him bounce).
This is a me too post (Ihug static)
I discovered this when I went to post on NZLUG mailing list (Hint: NZLUG
admins or people with power thereof)
Im a newbie at this so what are my options?
Ive emailed SORBS and pointed out my rdns has the word static in it, and they
werent helpful _at all_, and Ive spoken to IHUG's residential helpdesk (It
was just a little over their heads), I emailed the SORBS induced bounces to
automated responses, and nothing else.
If you or anyone else is having problems with NZLUG you can drop me a line
offlist, I help administer the list and can probably sort it or find
someone who can.

Mark.
Shane
2006-05-23 01:31:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Foster
Post by Shane
Post by Juha Saarinen
Post by Paul Adshead
It appears that SORBS are atill listing Telecom static IP ranges (-
which my address is in,) as dynamic ranges. Wasn't this in the process
of being fixed weeks/months ago? Does anyone have any ideas on how
long this is going to be until it's resolved?
The whole SORBS situation over the past months is becoming a total
joke, with mail admins I know turning off their use of SORBS - there is
just far far far too many false positives... :-(
Inspire Net IPs too... just got another SORBS induced bounce from a
Telecom's mail server.
Kind of funny that Telecom uses SORBS after the ORBS debacle though.
Someone should tell Alan Brown (I can't, because he uses SORBS too so
messages to him bounce).
This is a me too post (Ihug static)
I discovered this when I went to post on NZLUG mailing list (Hint: NZLUG
admins or people with power thereof)
Im a newbie at this so what are my options?
Ive emailed SORBS and pointed out my rdns has the word static in it, and
they werent helpful _at all_, and Ive spoken to IHUG's residential
helpdesk (It was just a little over their heads), I emailed the SORBS
got me the reassuring automated responses, and nothing else.
If you or anyone else is having problems with NZLUG you can drop me a line
offlist, I help administer the list and can probably sort it or find
someone who can.
Mark.
Well Ive sent mail to you twice about the issue, only to see in a later post
you are using SORBS to block mail yourself
Talk about circular dependencies :-)

Tony Wicks
2006-05-18 05:57:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Adshead
It appears that SORBS are atill listing Telecom static IP ranges (-
which my address is in,) as dynamic ranges. Wasn't this in the process
of being fixed weeks/months ago? Does anyone have any ideas on how long
this is going to be until it's resolved?
The whole SORBS situation over the past months is becoming a total joke,
with mail admins I know turning off their use of SORBS - there is just
far far far too many false positives... :-(
Paul.
One would certainly wonder why any sane NZ ISP would use SORBS !
Mark Foster
2006-05-18 06:00:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Wicks
Post by Paul Adshead
It appears that SORBS are atill listing Telecom static IP ranges (-
which my address is in,) as dynamic ranges. Wasn't this in the process
of being fixed weeks/months ago? Does anyone have any ideas on how long
this is going to be until it's resolved?
The whole SORBS situation over the past months is becoming a total joke,
with mail admins I know turning off their use of SORBS - there is just
far far far too many false positives... :-(
Paul.
One would certainly wonder why any sane NZ ISP would use SORBS !
Doesn't this come back to the 'use them for scoring, but don't block just
coz they say so' ?? (Didn't someone say this recently???)

Course, we can't speak for overseas ISPs and their levels of sanity, and
the point could be made that _anyone_ who uses SORBS to drop email is
causing a potential disruption... So the scale obviously depends on the
'who'.

(and I have to admitt i'm not one to talk; I use the SORBS Dynamic IP
Lists myself. Noone has yet complained.... )

Mark.
Jeremy Brooking
2006-05-18 06:45:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Wicks
One would certainly wonder why any sane NZ ISP would use SORBS !
One would wonder why any sane mail admin wouldnt pull data from as many
sources as possible when deciding on how to score spam.
Tony Wicks
2006-05-18 07:06:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy Brooking
One would wonder why any sane mail admin wouldnt pull data from as
many sources as possible when deciding on how to score spam.
Sure, but surely there has to be some measure of accuracy involved ? I
mean SORBS is about as accurate as choosing every even IP address on
Monday and public holidays, every odd one on every other day. It's just
not even close to being what it is supposed to be billed as.
Jeremy Brooking
2006-05-18 07:29:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Wicks
Sure, but surely there has to be some measure of accuracy involved ? I
mean SORBS is about as accurate as choosing every even IP address on
Monday and public holidays, every odd one on every other day.
Sure, but it still works better than say, sitting around doing nothing
with ya thumb in ya arse.

Id be interested to know. Do you use SORBS? Or is your judgement of them
based on second hard information?
Andrew Redgwell
2006-05-18 07:28:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy Brooking
One would wonder why any sane mail admin wouldnt pull data from as many
sources as possible when deciding on how to score spam.
No matter how inaccurate those sources may be ?

How many ISPs use a naming convention for their rDNS which clearly
differentiates static from dynamic address space ? I could be wrong
here, but from my experience, not many.

Considering this is one of the methods SORBS used to identify suitable
netblocks for the DUHL, its no wonder so many static ranges are listed.

And anyway, who wants to deal with people who resort to extortion
(http://www.au.sorbs.net/faq/spamdb.shtml).


--
Andrew
Jeremy Brooking
2006-05-18 07:41:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew Redgwell
Post by Jeremy Brooking
One would wonder why any sane mail admin wouldnt pull data from as many
sources as possible when deciding on how to score spam.
No matter how inaccurate those sources may be ?
Id be interested in seeing where you get this information regarding the
accuracy of sorbs dul list?

Or is it a simple case of "Buhu I got on their list once, they must be
totally innacurate!" ?
Post by Andrew Redgwell
How many ISPs use a naming convention for their rDNS which clearly
differentiates static from dynamic address space ? I could be wrong
here, but from my experience, not many.
So a number of ISPs dont update their rdns often, this is the fault of
sorbs how?
Post by Andrew Redgwell
Considering this is one of the methods SORBS used to identify suitable
netblocks for the DUHL, its no wonder so many static ranges are listed.
And being listed alone isnt enough to get your mail blocks by most
peoples setups.

As others have mentioned using sorbs dul list to add weight to any
tagging can be, and in my experience is a very effective way of helping
combat spam.

The flaw isnt in their information, its in how the information they
provide is used.


PS: Whitelisting isnt that hard.
Bruce Harding
2006-05-18 07:48:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy Brooking
Id be interested in seeing where you get this information regarding the
accuracy of sorbs dul list?
It's not so much that they are inaccurate, as that they are woefully out
of date, If they are going to publish a blacklist, then they have a
responsibility to keep it current.
Post by Jeremy Brooking
So a number of ISPs dont update their rdns often, this is the fault of
sorbs how?
The rdns info they are currently using to block a number of our address
ranges date back to november 2005.
--
Bruce Harding

Inspire Net Ltd

Phone : 06 357 8559
Fax : 06 353 1154
Mobile : 021 519 024
Jeremy Brooking
2006-05-18 07:57:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bruce Harding
It's not so much that they are inaccurate, as that they are woefully out
of date, If they are going to publish a blacklist, then they have a
responsibility to keep it current.
I understand this. But they do accurately list a phenominal number of
spam sources.
TreeNet Admin
2006-05-19 05:44:38 UTC
Permalink
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Redgwell" <a-***@clear.net.nz>
To: <***@mafia.org>
Cc: <***@list.waikato.ac.nz>
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: [nznog] SORBS still listing Telecom static IPs as dynamic...


<snip>
Post by Andrew Redgwell
Considering this is one of the methods SORBS used to identify suitable
netblocks for the DUHL, its no wonder so many static ranges are listed.
And anyway, who wants to deal with people who resort to extortion
(http://www.au.sorbs.net/faq/spamdb.shtml).
Please do get your facts straight.
The donation requirement is only applicable to proven spam sources. Not the
DUHL or any of the other service/state-related listings.

Besides which, how on earth can you justify a charitable donation to CCF,
Red Cross or any other service _of your own choice_ extortion?


AYJ
Andrew Redgwell
2006-05-19 06:21:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by TreeNet Admin
Please do get your facts straight.
The donation requirement is only applicable to proven spam sources. Not the
DUHL or any of the other service/state-related listings.
Besides which, how on earth can you justify a charitable donation to CCF,
Red Cross or any other service _of your own choice_ extortion?
Do I get to put the money back in my pocket ? No ? Then perhaps you need
to look up the definition of extortion; heres a link:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=extortion


--
Andrew

PS - Thunderbird thinks this thread is trash.
Jamie Riden
2006-05-19 08:53:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew Redgwell
Post by TreeNet Admin
Besides which, how on earth can you justify a charitable donation to
CCF,
Post by TreeNet Admin
Red Cross or any other service _of your own choice_ extortion?
Do I get to put the money back in my pocket ? No ? Then perhaps you need
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=extortion
1. The act or an instance of extorting.
2. Illegal use of one's official position or powers to obtain
property, funds, or patronage.
3. An excessive or exorbitant charge.
4. Something extorted.

So either 50 bucks is 'exorbitant', or someone elected Matt King of
the Internet when I wasn't looking. Inquiring minds would like to
know.
Will Steele
2006-05-19 09:09:14 UTC
Permalink
That definition of extortion is the American definition. I argue that as
this is mailing list is predominantly non-American, we should be using the
correct definition.

extort
/ikstort/

. verb obtain by force, threats, or other unfair means.

- DERIVATIVES extorter noun extortion noun extortioner noun extortionist
noun extortive adjective.

- ORIGIN Latin extorquere, from torquere 'twist'.


Please don't use American English. Won't someone please think of the
children!



-----Original Message-----
From: Jamie Riden [mailto:***@europe.com]
Sent: Friday, 19 May 2006 8:54 p.m.
To: Andrew Redgwell
Cc: ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
Subject: Re: [nznog] SORBS still listing Telecom static IPs as dynamic...
Post by TreeNet Admin
Besides which, how on earth can you justify a charitable donation
to CCF, > Red Cross or any other service _of your own choice_
extortion?
Do I get to put the money back in my pocket ? No ? Then perhaps you
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=extortion
1. The act or an instance of extorting.
2. Illegal use of one's official position or powers to obtain property,
funds, or patronage.
3. An excessive or exorbitant charge.
4. Something extorted.

So either 50 bucks is 'exorbitant', or someone elected Matt King of the
Internet when I wasn't looking. Inquiring minds would like to know.
Jean-Francois Pirus
2006-05-19 11:41:25 UTC
Permalink
Could we please stop this thread, it is now out of the AUP
of this list and is becoming flamebait.

This is one of those grey subject where there will always
be disagreements.

Thanks.


jfp.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jean-Francois Pirus <***@clearfield.com> Senior Software Engineer
Phone (+64-9) 358 2081 Clearfield Software Ltd
Fax (+64-9) 358 2083 4th Floor 8-10 Whitaker Place
Mob (+64-21) 640 779 P O Box 3901 Auckland, New Zealand
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oscars Air
2006-05-19 12:31:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Steele
Please don't use American English. Won't someone please think of the
children!
American English, thats an oxymoron isnt it ?
Jamie Riden
2006-05-18 07:54:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Wicks
Post by Paul Adshead
It appears that SORBS are atill listing Telecom static IP ranges (-
which my address is in,) as dynamic ranges. Wasn't this in the process
of being fixed weeks/months ago? Does anyone have any ideas on how long
this is going to be until it's resolved?
The whole SORBS situation over the past months is becoming a total joke,
with mail admins I know turning off their use of SORBS - there is just
far far far too many false positives... :-(
Paul.
One would certainly wonder why any sane NZ ISP would use SORBS !
SORBS has a couple of different zones, so I assume you mean the
dynamic space list. The other zones - http.dnsbl.sorbs.net,
socks.dnsbl.sorbs.net, misc.dnsbl.sorbs.net, smtp.dnsbl.sorbs.net,
web.dnsbl.sorbs.net, spam.dnsbl.sorbs.net, zombie.dnsbl.sorbs.net,
badconf.rhsbl.sorbs.net and nomail.rhsbl.sorbs.net - are very useful.

Personally, I don't think that dul.sorbs.net is a good list for
rejecting mail, but it's still reasonable for scoring mail. Anyway, I
think admins should probably be whitelisting servers they particularly
want mail from, e.g. scoring up NZ IPs. I seem to recall that XTRA has
made it into other RBLs in the past, hasn't it?

cheers,
Jamie
--
Jamie Riden / ***@europe.com / ***@computer.org
NZ Honeynet project - http://www.nz-honeynet.org/
Jeremy Strachan
2006-05-18 09:02:08 UTC
Permalink
My view is SORBS is a crock of shit, as was ORBS. If the day ends in "y"
they block it ...

Its called all care - no responsibility... They will blacklist entire
(static) IP ranges with no warning, and no realistic way of removing the
block, and treat everyone like s..t.

The process is inherently flawed, because of the way static ranges end
up on their list without reasonable checks.

If they blocked a single IP address - then fine, its their wholesale and
cavalier attitude to blocking entire ranges that is the root cause of
the problem I have with S(ORBS), and why they are hated so much by
people like me.

No other blacklist operates like - or generates the hate - that S(ORBS)
does.

If they vanished tommorrow, the world would be a better place.


Jeremy


-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Wicks [mailto:***@prophecy.net.nz]
Sent: Thursday, 18 May 2006 7:06 p.m.
Cc: ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
Subject: Re: [nznog] SORBS still listing Telecom static IPs as
dynamic...
Post by Jeremy Brooking
One would wonder why any sane mail admin wouldnt pull data from as
many sources as possible when deciding on how to score spam.
Sure, but surely there has to be some measure of accuracy involved ? I
mean SORBS is about as accurate as choosing every even IP address on
Monday and public holidays, every odd one on every other day. It's just
not even close to being what it is supposed to be billed as.
Jeremy Brooking
2006-05-18 09:15:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy Strachan
If they vanished tommorrow, the world would be a better place.
One could say that about the clueless.
Jamie Riden
2006-05-18 19:59:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy Strachan
My view is SORBS is a crock of shit, as was ORBS. If the day ends in "y"
they block it ...
'They' do not block anything. dul.sorbs.net lists stuff that's thought
to be in dynamic space. The mail admin has to take a decision to
reject using dul (or the composite zone, which I suspect is usually
the issue).
Post by Jeremy Strachan
No other blacklist operates like - or generates the hate - that S(ORBS)
does.
Actually, I've seen people say that and worse about every single
blacklist including SBL, which is probably the most conservative one,
all the way back to the MAPS original.
--
Jamie Riden / ***@europe.com / ***@computer.org
NZ Honeynet project - http://www.nz-honeynet.org/
Scott Weeks
2006-05-18 20:22:43 UTC
Permalink
----- Original Message Follows -----
Post by Jamie Riden
Post by Jeremy Strachan
No other blacklist operates like - or generates the hate
- that S(ORBS) does.
Actually, I've seen people say that and worse about every
single blacklist including SBL, which is probably the most
conservative one, all the way back to the MAPS original.
They all say that if you're not a spammer, you have to pay
LOTS of money to people they tell you to pay to be delisted?

http://www.au.sorbs.net/faq/spamdb.shtml

"Third and finally, if you are really not a spammer, or you
are truly reformed, de-listing is relatively easy. You
donate US$50 to a charity or trust approved by, and not
connected with, SORBS for each spam received related to the
listing. This is referred to as the SORBS 'fine'."

scott
Will Steele
2006-05-18 20:39:59 UTC
Permalink
It's ironic that my inbox is getting spammed with stuff about spam :)

We all know spam blacklisting is ghey and pointless because it causes more
problems than it fixes, so must we really hear the same shit all over again?

Please stfu now. Kthx.


-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Weeks [mailto:***@mauigateway.com]
Sent: Friday, 19 May 2006 8:23 a.m.
To: ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
Subject: Re: [nznog] SORBS still listing Telecom static IPs as dynamic...

----- Original Message Follows -----
Post by Jamie Riden
Post by Jeremy Strachan
No other blacklist operates like - or generates the hate
- that S(ORBS) does.
Actually, I've seen people say that and worse about every single
blacklist including SBL, which is probably the most conservative one,
all the way back to the MAPS original.
They all say that if you're not a spammer, you have to pay LOTS of money to
people they tell you to pay to be delisted?

http://www.au.sorbs.net/faq/spamdb.shtml

"Third and finally, if you are really not a spammer, or you are truly
reformed, de-listing is relatively easy. You donate US$50 to a charity or
trust approved by, and not connected with, SORBS for each spam received
related to the listing. This is referred to as the SORBS 'fine'."

scott
Drew Broadley
2006-05-18 23:08:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Steele
It's ironic that my inbox is getting spammed with stuff about spam :)
We all know spam blacklisting is ghey and pointless because it causes more
problems than it fixes, so must we really hear the same shit all over again?
Please stfu now. Kthx.
/me submits you to SORBS.

Now, you'll find out how much of an arse it is to get removed and the
reason why this discussion is happening.

+5 Insightful.

-Drew
Jamie Riden
2006-05-18 20:42:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Weeks
----- Original Message Follows -----
Post by Jamie Riden
Post by Jeremy Strachan
No other blacklist operates like - or generates the hate
- that S(ORBS) does.
Actually, I've seen people say that and worse about every
single blacklist including SBL, which is probably the most
conservative one, all the way back to the MAPS original.
They all say that if you're not a spammer, you have to pay
LOTS of money to people they tell you to pay to be delisted?
The DUL doesn't work like that :

"The general rules of delisting are as follows:

The Regional Internet Registry (RIR) Point of Contact (PoC) can
request a listing or delisting of any address in their space. The only
time this will be refused is when the netblock information in the RIR
or in the reverse DNS naming clearly indicates the addresses are
dynamically assigned (e.g. 0.1.pool.example.com).

Anyone else may request delisting of addresses or netblocks provided
that reverse DNS naming is set to indicate static assignment." --
http://www.au.sorbs.net/faq/dul.shtml

Please note, I do note recommend using dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net to reject
mail. It will block 'legitimate' mail.
--
Jamie Riden / ***@europe.com / ***@computer.org
NZ Honeynet project - http://www.nz-honeynet.org/
dub
2006-05-18 22:26:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jamie Riden
Post by Scott Weeks
----- Original Message Follows -----
Post by Jamie Riden
Post by Jeremy Strachan
No other blacklist operates like - or generates the hate
- that S(ORBS) does.
Actually, I've seen people say that and worse about every
single blacklist including SBL, which is probably the most
conservative one, all the way back to the MAPS original.
They all say that if you're not a spammer, you have to pay
LOTS of money to people they tell you to pay to be delisted?
The Regional Internet Registry (RIR) Point of Contact (PoC) can
request a listing or delisting of any address in their space. The only
time this will be refused is when the netblock information in the RIR
or in the reverse DNS naming clearly indicates the addresses are
dynamically assigned ( e.g. 0.1.pool.example.com).
Anyone else may request delisting of addresses or netblocks provided
that reverse DNS naming is set to indicate static assignment." --
http://www.au.sorbs.net/faq/dul.shtml
Please note, I do note recommend using dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net to reject
mail. It will block 'legitimate' mail.
--
NZ Honeynet project - http://www.nz-honeynet.org/
_______________________________________________
NZNOG mailing list
http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
Jamie, its clear you have never had the misfortune of trying to deal with
them as an 'RIR PoC'.
Donald Neal
2006-05-19 12:45:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oscars Air
Post by Will Steele
Please don't use American English. Won't someone please think of the
children!
American English, thats an oxymoron isnt it ?
I have no doubt of the relevance of most of this thread, but it seems to
have now run its course.

- Donald Neal
List Asministrator

Donald Neal |"Email is not to be used to pass on
Support Engineer |information or data. It should be
NGN Operations |used only for company business."
Integration & Services Division +-----------------------------------
Alcatel NZ Ltd - Telecom's network operations manager

This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002.
Loading...