Martin Hannigan wrote:
Can someone please indirectly email Mr. Oquendo and advise him that we would like to have a word with him? He seems to have blocked Google and has made us unable to have a chat.
Blocked Google? Strange I got this message. But since you wanted to direct this back to the list when I responded to you, let me level the playing ground and post my direct response to you. Since after all I did follow procedures and leave it off the list. // BEGIN
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 17:50:24 -0600 From: "J. Oquendo" <sil@infiltrated.net> To: Martin Hannigan <hannigan@gmail.com> Cc: admins@nanog.org Subject: Re: Cisco outage Message-ID: <20071126235024.GA39489@infiltrated.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Martin Hannigan wrote:
We don't mind seeing reports on important parts of the overall critical infrastructure being impacted, but we could probably do without the off-topic remark that seems to be inaccurate as well. This
I've made four posts in about three months... Is this a targeted "shut up" http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/
In the future, please help us to make sure NANOG is operational by being on topic -- and accurate -- wherenever posting.
The link was/is relevant, comment is just a comment. Should I in turn complain about someone's signatures? Take a look at my four posts. Their comments and their all relevant to someone else's comment as are everyone's comments and responses.
How many posts have I made? 12 in seven months... http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/index2.html
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9823196-7.html
So much for self healing networks eh
Something personal you have to say, say it. But bitching and whining about me being off topic according to your personal taste and you'd have a hell of a lot of bitching to do about a hell of alot of other people. // END
Hopefully, this won't bounce like our private message did. We'll be forced to throw him off the list, sadly.
Now to be on topic, you state I bounced mail from Gmail? Why didn't you include the SMTP error, I'd be curious to see where I blocked it to correct it. sudo grep -i hanni /var/log/maillog Nov 27 00:01:14 kryptonite postfix/qmgr[81759]: D5BB73F420: from=<hannigan@gmail.com>, size=2582, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Nov 27 00:01:15 kryptonite postfix/pickup[73054]: 675043F43F: uid=1006 from=<hannigan@gmail.com> Nov 27 00:01:15 kryptonite postfix/qmgr[81759]: 675043F43F: from=<hannigan@gmail.com>, size=2878, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Nov 27 00:01:15 kryptonite postfix/qmgr[81759]: 763723F443: from=<hannigan@gmail.com>, size=3061, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Nov 27 00:01:36 kryptonite postfix/qmgr[81759]: CA1DB3F445: from=<hannigan@gmail.com>, size=2544, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Nov 27 00:01:37 kryptonite postfix/pickup[73054]: 2815A3F449: uid=1006 from=<hannigan@gmail.com> Nov 27 00:01:37 kryptonite postfix/qmgr[81759]: 2815A3F449: from=<hannigan@gmail.com>, size=2840, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Nov 27 00:01:37 kryptonite postfix/qmgr[81759]: 470EA3F44B: from=<hannigan@gmail.com>, size=3023, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Funny, I don't see a rejection from me to you. If there were though, how does a private domain come into a NANOG thread. Its not like Infiltrated is an ISP, NSP, NAP or any other peer or provider. So again I ask you to look at my postings for the last 6 or 7 months where my responses are minimal. Operational you state? Was this something akin to me posting about Botnets but operators stating that 10gigs of malware laced traffic is not operational? J. Oquendo SIGNATURE REMOVED TO AVOID BREAKING POLICY http://www.infiltrated.net/nanogpolice.jpg ----- End forwarded message ----- -- =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ J. Oquendo SGFA #579 (FW+VPN v4.1) SGFE #574 (FW+VPN v4.1) echo c2lsQGluZmlsdHJhdGVkLm5ldAo=|\ python -c "import sys; print sys.stdin.read().decode('base64')" http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xF684C42E
On Nov 27, 2007 8:18 AM, J. Oquendo <sil@infiltrated.net> wrote:
Martin Hannigan wrote:
Can someone please indirectly email Mr. Oquendo and advise him that we would like to have a word with him? He seems to have blocked Google and has made us unable to have a chat.
Blocked Google? Strange I got this message. But since you wanted to direct this back to the list when I responded to you, let me level the playing ground and post my direct response to you. Since after all I did follow procedures and leave it off the list.
I received the following message when I responded to your complaint related to my first note, which you opted to post to the list.
Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
sil@infiltrated.net
Technical details of permanent failure: PERM_FAILURE: SMTP Error (state 13): 554 Service unavailable; Client host [209.85.198.190] blocked using ubl.unsubscore.com; Sender has sent to LashBack Unsubscribe Probe accounts
Let me repost my response to your complaint, which it appears you may not have gotten: --begin We do have people "bitching" when they are asked to be more on-topic, much like people bitch when they get speeding tickets. They seem to "slow down" after our requests and are remarkably on topic. 4. Postings that include foul language, character assassination, and lack of respect for other participants are prohibited. 6. Postings of political, philosophical, and legal nature are prohibited. We could take a drive down Warning St. if you like, but we prefer to point out things without warnings and suggest voluntary compliance instead of arm twisting with warnings. It's your choice, not ours. --end Let me reiterate that my motivation was my interpretation of your conduct on the list previously as being fairly non contributory and combative, as demonstrated above. It's certainly ok for you to disagree. I welcome it so that we can attempt to make the list better. That does not mean that you are correct. Your belief that my interpretation is incorrect, and open for debate, is noted and will be taken up with a higher power at a later date. Best Regards, Martin Hannigan NANOG MLC Member
participants (2)
-
J. Oquendo -
Martin Hannigan