16 Oct
2011
16 Oct
'11
1:45 a.m.
Ditto, and I do find it informative. Jim On Oct 15, 2011, at 10:35 PM, Kyle Creyts <kyle.creyts@gmail.com> wrote:
I may not read it for the purpose of aggregation, but it is useful data to me for other purposes.
As long as there is one person talking and at least one person listening, a thread is in order, and it isn't spam. On Oct 15, 2011 3:25 PM, "Geoff Huston" <gih@apnic.net> wrote:
From what I learned at the latest NANOG it's very clear that nobody reads this any more.
Is there any good reason to persist in spamming the nanog list with this report?
thanks, Geoff