nanog mailing list archives
Re: Akamai wierdness
From: Paul Wall <pauldotwall () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 09:18:07 -0500
Patrick Gilmore wrote [context inserted]:
Perhaps using the RFC required address [noc@akamai] would be more
productive than e-mailing 10k strangers? Normally I see emails like this and, if it's Not In My Back Yard, and the Internet is not going nutz, the delete key explains how worried i am. Back to your email:
using the RFC required address
The correct catty response to the Akamai question is : ccare () akamai com. That's C as in "Customer", Care as in "they actually care". I would end the email there, but it really gets me how someone that is in-house doesn't realize that noc@akamai is a black hole. Drive Slow, -paul
Current thread:
- Akamai wierdness John Palmer (NANOG Acct) (Mar 22)
- RE: Akamai wierdness Paul Stewart (Mar 22)
- Re: Akamai wierdness John Palmer (NANOG Acct) (Mar 22)
- Re: Akamai wierdness Patrick W. Gilmore (Mar 22)
- Re: Akamai wierdness Paul Wall (Mar 23)
- Re: Akamai wierdness JC Dill (Mar 23)
- RE: Akamai wierdness Paul Stewart (Mar 23)
- Re: Akamai wierdness Charles Wyble (Mar 23)
- Re: Akamai wierdness John Palmer (NANOG Acct) (Mar 22)
- Re: Akamai wierdness Paul Wall (Mar 23)
- Re: Akamai wierdness JC Dill (Mar 24)
- Re: Akamai wierdness Paul Wall (Mar 24)
- Re: Akamai wierdness jamie rishaw (Mar 24)
- Re: Akamai wierdness JC Dill (Mar 24)
- RE: Akamai wierdness Paul Stewart (Mar 22)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Akamai wierdness Jeffrey Cohen (Mar 25)
- Re: Akamai wierdness JC Dill (Mar 25)