Oh yeah: If dupes bother you, 'man procmailex' and implement dupe
filtering. For one, with nanog-l delays from one to 12 hours, I like to
see responses quickly.
# from the procmailex man page, this is supposed to weed out duplicate
# messages.
:0 Wh: msgid.lock
P.S. OWEN, PLEASE STOP CC'ING ME ON REPLIES. EITHER REPLY TO ME ONLY, OR
TO THE LIST (WHICHEVER YOU PREFER), BUT NOT TO BOTH.pps: Lazily clicking "reply to all" and sending off a message (with an
unwanted *attachment* no less) cc'd to a bunch of people who don't need
duplicate replies typically goes hand in hand with top posting. These are
clear signs of someone who is too lazy to bother with following standard
conventions, and who thinks that it's OK to do the lazy "easy" thing even
when it inconveniences others.
I've seen lots of requests in both directions, over the years.
On a slow list like this, people often like to be cc'd directly.
It's hard to know what to do in all situations, other than mind
one's own mailbox. There are ways to filter out duplicates,
and that seems (to me) to be the best.
Yours,
mm
Might want to go for 32K or 64K there, if you get a lot of mail.
I just checked a folder of 6K or so messages, and the average message-id
was 48 chars long. So only about 334 of them will fit in 16K (less if
you allow for database overhead) - so if you're likely to get more than
250-300 messages between the two you care about dup suppression, it
won't catch it.
Certification of internet resource allocations is being actively considered by
most if not all RIRs. In the case of APNIC, this has been regarded as a likely
development since our CA project started several years ago (always subject to
community agreement on appropriate standards).
As it happens, the IETF PKIX working group has almost completed the certificate
extension specification for this very purpose, within the S-BGP framework:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pkix-x509-ipaddr-as-extn-03.txt
Regardless of the deployment of S-BGP, RIRs could start issuing certificates any
time after specification is completed. APNIC is currently investigating this
possibility.
cheers
-George