nanog mailing list archives
Re: today's Wash Post Business section
From: Jim Popovitch <jimpop () yahoo com>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:40:35 -0500
On Fri, 2006-12-22 at 11:36 +1100, Mark Andrews wrote:
(Hint - how much smaller would the spam problem be if end users actually looked at their cable or DSL modem and wondered why the Tx/Rx lights were on steady even though nothing was apparently happening?)Given the amount of noise on a cable modem flickering lights mean nothing.
My cable modem, and my Dad's, and my friends', flicker endlessly even though when the computers are are shutoff (OK, my wifi router is still on). The flicker isn't from outbound traffic, it's from incoming crap. -Jim P.
Current thread:
- Re: today's Wash Post Business section, (continued)
- Re: today's Wash Post Business section Alexander Harrowell (Dec 21)
- Re: today's Wash Post Business section Andy Davidson (Dec 21)
- Re: today's Wash Post Business section Richard P. Welty (Dec 21)
- Re: today's Wash Post Business section Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 21)
- Re: today's Wash Post Business section Jeff Shultz (Dec 21)
- Re: today's Wash Post Business section J. Oquendo (Dec 21)
- Re: today's Wash Post Business section Thomas Leavitt (Dec 23)
- Re: today's Wash Post Business section Michael Painter (Dec 23)
- Re: today's Wash Post Business section Alexander Harrowell (Dec 21)
- Re: today's Wash Post Business section Joseph S D Yao (Dec 21)
- Re: today's Wash Post Business section Mark Andrews (Dec 21)
- Re: today's Wash Post Business section Jim Popovitch (Dec 21)