nanog mailing list archives
Re: The Terrible Secret of MAAWG (was Re: Internet Email Services Association ( wasRE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587?))
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists () gmail com>
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 07:41:57 +0530
And what's an even stranger secret is that MAAWG members get to pay double the registration fee of non maawg members :) Now that's openness for you ... Come on in .. it is the nearest thing to nanog that I've seen for mail ops people in the NA region (+ quite a lot of the world). --srs (I like apcauce better, but well I organize it so I got to be proud of it) :) On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 16:47:31 -0800, J.D. Falk <jdfalk () cybernothing org> wrote:
The second thing is the secrecy surrounding this group.You (or anyone else) can attend the meeting in San Diego. The price online for non-members was $100, but online registration is closed and I don't know what it'll cost on-site. Here's the agenda, complete with topics and names of presenters and who they each work for: http://www.maawg.org/news/news/0503_GeneralMeeting The secret has been revealed! Viva la revolucion!
-- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists () gmail com)
Current thread:
- RE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587?, (continued)
- RE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? andrew2 (Feb 25)
- RE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Christopher X. Candreva (Feb 25)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Joe Provo (Feb 26)
- RE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Sean Donelan (Feb 25)
- RE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Edward B. Dreger (Feb 26)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Jason Frisvold (Feb 25)
- Internet Email Services Association ( wasRE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587?) Michael . Dillon (Feb 25)
- Re: Internet Email Services Association ( wasRE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587?) Suresh Ramasubramanian (Feb 25)
- Re: Internet Email Services Association ( wasRE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587?) Michael . Dillon (Feb 25)
- The Terrible Secret of MAAWG (was Re: Internet Email Services Association ( wasRE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587?)) J.D. Falk (Feb 25)
- Re: The Terrible Secret of MAAWG (was Re: Internet Email Services Association ( wasRE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587?)) Suresh Ramasubramanian (Feb 25)
- Re: Internet Email Services Association ( wasRE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587?) Niels Bakker (Feb 25)
- Re: Internet Email Services Association ( wasRE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587?) Steven J. Sobol (Feb 26)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Eric A. Hall (Feb 25)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Frank Louwers (Feb 25)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? just me (Feb 25)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Christopher X. Candreva (Feb 25)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? just me (Feb 25)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Christopher X. Candreva (Feb 25)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Edward B. Dreger (Feb 25)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? just me (Feb 25)